TerraLiner:12 m Globally Mobile Beach House/Class-A Crossover w 6x6 Hybrid Drivetrain

[biotect]

Hi egn,

Many thanks for that personal disclosure. It's really quite incredible, then, all the places that you have been with your MAN KAT..... given that you did not know how to drive it until after you bought it!! That took some courage. As always, this most recent post was a real eye-opener.

Yes, pictures of Blue Thunder driving up that stony river-bed in Albania would be terrific to see in the thread.:wings: When/if you have time to post them.

The following is a summary of the questions that have emerged over the last few pages:


1. Orlov suggested that tire-proteciton chains of the kind made by RUD-Erlau would be too heavy, and unnecessary. He wrote that Hutchinson tire-protection shields should prove sufficient to prevent the kinds of punctures that Peter Kapschefky kept experiencing on the Canning Stock Route:

Forget about tire protection chains, they are way too heavy, you can not go fast with them, you will need a crew and special tools to mount them, and a trailer to drag them along!

With the price of 14.00 and 16.00R20 tires, a set of Hutchinson Tire Protection Shields as noted in post #623 seems like a good investment if planning to drive offroad like on the Canning Stock Route.

Do you agree or disagree? If so, why?


2. If you still think that heavy tire-proteciton chains of the kind made by RUD-Erlau are the way to go, which ones would you recommend getting for Michelin 14.00 R20 or 16.00 R20 tires? And why?

3. Would you know of any manufacturers other than Hutchinson, who make tire-protection shields with simple designs, as shown in Orlov's post immediately above? Perhaps a European manufacturer?

3. Do you know if or when Michelin might be coming out with Kevlar-reinforced XZL's?

4. Do you know of a web-link where one could find good information about Michelin off-road tires that are not XZL? In other words, the other tires in Michelin's off-road range, like the XML "mud tire" series, or the XS "sand tire" series? A link to one or two really good pdf-flyers describing these other types of Michelin off-road tires would be great.

No rush on these questions; whenever you are free to get around to answering them.....

All best wishes,


Biotect

 

[egn]

I have updated post http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/threads/124789-Fully-Integrated-MAN-or-TATRA-6x6-or-8x8-Expedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame?p=1669055#post1669055.

Regarding images from the KAT meeting I am a bit hesitant to post to many images, as this was kind of "private" meeting and when people are on the images I don't want to share them without the their consent.

Do you agree or disagree? If so, why?

I agree in part with his statements. I don't see the problem regarding speed. I wouldn't put them on on regular roads, just in very hard terrain where you couldn't drive that fast anyway. BTW, in Albania we have driven roads where we could only 10 km/h on average, because they were so bad. When the Canning Stock Route is that hard to drive then the speed would be no issue.

But it is true that the chains will be very heavy. As I already wrote that my traction chains weight about 25-30 kg per piece. Protection chains have to be much tighter and would impossible to handle by one person.

I don't know the chains in detail, so I am not able to recommend any. In case I would discuss this with an application engineer of RUD-Erlau and other suppliers.

The same is true regarding the tire protection shields. Hutchinson wheels are now very famous in the KAT community, because there surplus sold by the German army of aluminum wheels together with run flat system. Most people removed the run-flat system, because they aren't able to handle them without special machinery. Even the removal is hard to do without destroying something. So most people cut them in pieces with a saw.

I don't know anything about future plans of Michelin. Actually I have moved away for XZL because the comfort of this tires on long distant driving is not that good. They are getting very loud and on roads that have already tracks, because of the high weight vehicles, sometimes it gets really dangerous, because the XZL with their sharp blocks tend to crawl out of the track constantly. This causes you to have to be very concentrated in such situations, especially in tight space like were road work is done and you have only 20 cm left and right with spped of 80 km/h. The XZL are great in sand and other soft terrain. But when the road is wet or icy you should drive very very careful, because you have no traction.

As compromise I now use Conti HCS tires, which are not as durable and good off-road, of course. But they are much more fun to drive on-road.

Michelin has changed their website. There was some information about all the tire types available, but as always the experience of users is much better than the information from the manufacturers. So I cannot help you here.

 

[egn]

I didn't check if the RUD sidewall protection system has been already posted.

 

[Orlov]

Further discussion of tire protection chains for expedition work is an exercise in futility, as would anyone having put on truck tire chains, or tractor chains by themselves. Tire protection chains are several times heavier, will be slippery on rock, can not be used on paved roads, and can not be driven at any speed.
The Hutchinson Tire Saver Shield system would however be useful for our purpose.


Driving over very difficult terrain, I would rather focus on CTIS, like the smart system SpudBoy has on his truck.


Australian AIR CTI has a good video discussing the use of different tire pressures.



In this video of Tireboss system, note the loose sand and street tires on the truck.

 

[campo]

Hello Biotect and the others.
I do not want to interrupt your discussions but in order to let me make the thermal calculations
I would like to know if there is already some consensus about the project vehicle ?
.
Is it OK when I imagine your concept expedition RV vehicle as follows:
.
Will be built in 2017/2018 (innovative but not futuristic concept)
4 persons habitat driving,living,sleeping
Width 2,5m
Height whilst driving 3,40m , interior 2,0m (sorry not higher)
Fully integrated design 9,5m overall length.
Monocoque frame with independent suspension on 6 wheels.
= no chassis, no low differentials.
Front and back wheels can turn
6x6 hybrid propulsion system
Maximum traction HP between 400 and 500 HP
Small diesel engine 4 cylinder between 2 and 3 litres 300HP
Euro 6 exhaust emission class with ad blue.
Central engine on one side in front of axle2
Diesel propulsion only on the central axle (=permanent 6x2)
Central axle eventualy portal type only diesel propulsion
Electrical range and traction extender on first and last axle.
Top speed 140km/h tires
Low profile tires like XZL or XZY3 type 395/55R20
Normal driving speed layout for 100km/h green zone
Total weight, filled and ready to go 16 tons
Weight repartition front axle +/- 30%, central axle 40%, back axle +/-30%
Lithium battery propulsion pack 1000 -1200 kg probably 400VDC
Cooling and heating loop on this inside battery pack
Vehicle environment conditions from -40°C to +50°C
Big double glass front wind screen.
2 driver side windows identical layout
3 side windows on each side , wide and double thermic glass with gas and altitude approved up to 5000m with extra small frames on side windows, electric glass color changes posible.
Windows are optically improved
Body insulation 60mm all-round except windows and hatches.
Flat solar panels maximal roof size + on the hatches
Pop out roof on the captain’s bedroom (100kg extra)
Side pop out on the lounge area (150kg extra)
Garage in the back with electrical hatchback (+200kg)
No extra diesel genset but possibility to use the driving engine for stationary electricity and cooling.
Side walls in C130 transport shape (only upper top)
Design straight lines with rounded edges.
.
Design planning:
1. Overall idea and choice
2. Weight repartition and axle position
3. Hybrid propulsion components position
4. Monocoque design and suspension
5. Garage position and doors
6. Position of tanks, batteries and techniques
7. Interior layout
8. Exterior design

Regards Campo

 

[Haf-E]

I would go with an all-electric drive with a separate electric motor per axle (each with their own motor controller, charger and battery) and two smaller diesel generators. This would provide great redundancy.

Normal driving could be with any of the three axles. The diesels would not have a direct connection to the axles - only through the charging of the batteries. The diesels can also power other loads such as A/C or heating, etc.

Portal straight axles such as from unimogs would give great clearance and simple suspension design. No gearboxes should be required with this approach - so less weight and more compact layout.

 

[Amphibeast]

I'd love to add portal onto an independent set up. This is what the 8x8 is currently running....

 

[biotect]

..

Hi campo!

Welcome to this thread. I was hoping that you would participate here, too.....

I've composed a very long response to your excellent post, because your post was so well-structured, and provided a really nice, itemized summary of the major design and engineering issues. The posts below follow the sequence of your email exactly.


*************************************************


1. Engineering Innovative, not Engineering Futuristic;

....Technology Available Now, but Not Yet Proven in an Expedition Motorhome Application


*************************************************

Hello Biotect and the others.

I do not want to interrupt your discussions but in order to let me make the thermal calculations
I would like to know if there is already some consensus about the project vehicle ?
.
Is it OK when I imagine your concept expedition RV vehicle as follows:
.
Will be built in 2017/2018 (innovative but not futuristic concept)

That's a very nice way to describe the engineering target: "innovative" but not "futuristic". It's just way too easy as a transportation designer to imagine just about any technology one likes, and then develop a "futuristic" design based on purely hypothetical technology. The resulting concept vehicles are not that interesting, because they are almost completely un-buildable in the near-term, i.e. in the next 20 years. Whereas "innovative" sounds exactly right, at least in terms of mechanical engineering.

Earlier in the thread thjakits made a similar set of distinctions:

Anything is possible - if you dream it up! For the sake of this discussion, you need to decide if you want to build your theoretical rig with "technology available now" - "....available in the near future" - "...available and PROVEN" - ....you see where this is going!!

This too struck me as excellent thinking. Needless to say, when designing a concept vehicle one rarely opts for “….available and PROVEN”. This is something that Aspire seemed unable to understand..... :ylsmoke: .... On the other hand, “….available in the near future” seems a bit too vague. Just about everything is “available in the near future”. And as Aspire rightly suggested, if one does not self-impose meaningful engineering limits, then one can dream up anything one likes, but one's dream will prove a mere idle fantasy.

So "technology available now" but “not yet proven” seems like the best ball-park. For instance, the Capstone C30 and C65 microturbines are “available now”, but “not yet proven in an expedition vehicle application”.

Other kinds of hybrid solutions based on more conventional ICE technology are already “somewhat proven in an expedition vehicle application”. There is the latest diesel-electric Hybrid Range Rover, for instance – see http://expeditionportal.com/land-rover-launches-new-range-rover-hybrid/ , http://expeditionportal.com/silk-road-expedition-2013-nears-the-finish/ , http://expeditionportal.com/land-roves-banner-year-of-expedition/ , and http://expeditionportal.com/tag/hybrid/ . For a fully illustrated description of the “Silk Trail” Hybrid Range-Rover test drive in 2013, Birmingham to Mumbai, see posts #365 to #380, at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page37 and http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page38 . There is also a short thread about the Subaru XV Cross Trek Hybrid on ExPo – see http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/threads/118205-Subaru-XV-Cross-Trek-Hybrid .

So although hybrid technology is cutting-edge, real-world implementations in smaller off-road vehicles is indeed "technology available now". Just buy the latest Range Rover.

In larger off-road vehicles a hybrid solution is also "technology available now”: for instance, various implementations of the Oshkosh Propulse solution, as per the hybrid diesel-electric HEMTT A3 – see http://oshkoshdefense.com/vehicles/hemtt-a3-diesel-electric/ , http://www.hybrid-vehicle.org/hybrid-truck-hemtt.html , and see post # 334, at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page34 , or post #503 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page51 .

Furthermore, as already demonstrated in the previous few pages, a microturbine serial-hybrid solution is "technology available now”, for medium-sized garbarge trucks and transit buses.

So the only thing that's a bit radical about the concept being entertained in this thread, is possibly using a microturbine as range-extender, instead of a more standard rod-and-piston diesel ICE. Microturbine technology itself is not that innovative. Only the application of microturbine technology would be somewhat innovative, i.e. application to a large, RTW (round the world) expedition motorhome.


*************************************************


2. For a Well-Off, Recently Retired Couple who will be "Full-Timing" Around the World


*************************************************


The design aesthetic is another matter; that may or may not be "futuristic". It all depends on what you mean by "futuristic" as applied to styling and design.....:sombrero: More on that topic at the end of this series of posts.

4 persons habitat driving,living,sleeping

No, not quite. My sense is that the ideal "consumer demographic" would be an elderly couple, recently retired, who travel mostly just as a couple. Perhaps there is an extra pull-down bed, as in many "Liner" motorhomes, for when children or relatives visit. But otherwise, just two people.

However, these two people will be sleeping and living full-time in the motorhome, 24/7, week after week, month after month, for years. A true "full-timing" vehicle for RTW (round the world) travel.

Here I should add that, as near as I can tell, most motorhomes intended for serious full-timing, are not designed for family use, i.e. they are not designed for extended use by 4 for 5 people. All you need to do is take a look at the number of separate and distinct bedrooms in the design. Most motorhome designs, even the very biggest, have just one main bedroom. Sure, maybe there is a pull-down bed above the cab-area, or perhaps the couches can convert into a second bed. But that is not a truly "comfortable" arrangement long-term, for those who are supposed to use the temporary beds.

Typically this kind of ersatz solution only "works" for a family, if the family still has relatively young children (ages 3 to 6), children who are wiling to sleep together in a more temporary kind of bed. And it only "works" for a family that has slightly older children (6 to 12), if there is not just one pull-down bed, but at least two or three separate and distinct temporary sleep areas. Perhaps a pull-down bed + a couch that converts into a bed. In other words, as many separate and distinct sleeping areas as there are slightly older children.

But for a family to expect that teenagers over 13 will be satisfied with such an arrangement is a bit crazy. Teenagers will rebel against it, and they will be justified in rebelling against it. Parents who are fond of overlanding, and who cannot seem to understand why their adolescent finds it demeaning and humiliating to sleep for weeks on end in a makeshift, temporary bed that has no privacy, and that does double-duty during the daytime as a couch, need their heads examined. Their adolescent teenager is tracking reality; they are not.

By way of contrast, the Shachagra, for instance, was designed for extensive, long-term touring by a family of five with teenagers. Which meant that the Shachagra had no less than five separate and distinct permanent bedrooms. But Shachagra was a very unique and very special design, built for special circumstances. Very rarely will a family of five with teenagers tour Europe for over a year in a motorhome .

So again, I am not designing that. Rather, I am designing for a much more standard consumer demographic: for an elderly couple, recently retired.



*************************************************


3. Height: 3.95 m


*************************************************

Width 2,5m
Height whilst driving 3,40m , interior 2,0m (sorry not higher)
Fully integrated design 9,5m overall length.

Width and length are correct, but height....? There seems to be a difference of opinion in the thread whether an expedition motorhome should be 3.4, or 3.6, or 3.95 m high. egn's Blue Thunder is 3.95 m, and he seems to have seen more territory on planet earth with Blue Thunder than most overlanders. As described above, egn just drove up a creek in the wilds of Albania, because his wife (his wife?!?) wanted him to drive up a stony creek bed. Where does one find a wife like egn's???

In any case, my own inclination regarding height is to side with egn, designing for 3.95 m.....:sombrero:


*************************************************


4. Front and Rear Wheel Steering


*************************************************

Front and back wheels can turn

Many thanks for picking up on that "front and back wheels can turn" detail. The question of rear-wheel steering occupied quite a few posts at the beginning of this thread. It struck a number of people as controversial; as a piece of "biotect nonsense" that perhaps they are now happy we are no longer discussing? Whereas you picked up on it without a blink.

As the thread developed, it became evident that rear-axle steering is fairly common, even in extremely robust vehicles intended for harsh environments, like trucks used for mining. Tatra offers rear-axle steering as a standard modification, for instance, as does Volvo. And a few months ago I came across yet another company that specializes in big, heavy-duty trucks, a Dutch company called "Terberg", that also does rear-axle steering. The following three images all show the rear axles of Terberg's heavy-duty dump trucks being steered:





[video=youtube;7VnjKRS4ttc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VnjKRS4ttc [/video]


See http://www.terberg.nl/uk/industry/tractors-and-trucks.php ,http://www.terbergbenschop.nl/uk/products/trucks_open.php , http://www.terbergtechniek.nl/uk/modifications/pusher-and-tag-axles.php , and http://www.terbergtechniek.nl/uk/modifications/wheelbase-modifications.php .

At a more theoretical level, a Dutch entrepreneur who worked in mining in Indonesia has been trying to develop a completely new line of mining trucks, trucks in which all the axles steer:


[video=youtube;rWtJqdzw5as]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWtJqdzw5as [/video] [video=youtube;t2FFaBPvvCo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2FFaBPvvCo&list=PLB1FBF9A6DC4CC0CB [/video]
[video=youtube;Tn8cXP0-o2c]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn8cXP0-o2c&list=UUFt6Oo-eMpLkhnzKWOrgGTw [/video]


See http://www.oemoffhighway.com/article/10769943/non-rigid-design-of-a-rigid-haul-truck , http://www.etftrucks.eu/downloads/etf_brochure.pdf/ , http://www.etftrucks.eu , http://www.etftrucks.eu/Mining-Trucks/ , http://www.etftrucks.eu/Innovations/#.VCB-t3m9_6k , http://www.etftrucks.eu/Innovations/Axle-Configuration/ ,http://www.etftrucks.eu/Innovations/Steering-System/ , http://www.etftrucks.eu/Pictures/ , https://www.youtube.com/user/ETFMiningTrucks , and https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL15A689C2F23F591F .

So far ETF's proposals all seem very theoretical, and I have not been able to find even one picture of a completed, real, living ETF truck. But the "innovations" page on the ETF website makes for some very interesting reading!

And rear-wheel steering from more well-known manufacturers for demanding applications certainly is a technology that is "available right now."


*************************************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*************************************************


5. Off-road Capable, Military-Grade, Serial-Hybrid Power Train


*************************************************


The idea of "no low differentials" seems a possible consequence of going serial hybrid-electric. But honestly, I am still researching how Oshkosh, Lockheed-Martin, BAE systems, and others have configured their hybrid-electric, off-road capable, military-grade vehicles. So overlanders like yourself who have much more off-road experience than me, and who know something about how serial hybrids operate, would be in a much better position to offer sound suggestions for hybrid configurations that maximize off-road capability.

One thing I have learned over the last few months, is that Oshkosh has a particularly deep and long-standing commitment to off-road hybrid technology. Indeed, for Oshkosh there is nothing "futuristic" about off-road hybrid at all. The Oshkosh website suggests that alternative diesel-electric power-trains based on its “Propulse” technology are available right now, including a hybrid power-train for the L-ATV – see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oshkosh_L-ATV , http://oshkoshdefense.com/products/light-tactical-vehicles/ , http://oshkoshdefense.com/vehicles/l-atv/ , http://oshkoshdefense.com/vehicles/jltv/ , http://oshkoshdefense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/LATV_Global_6page_SnglPgs_LowRes.pdf , and http://oshkoshdefense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/16589_JLTV_8pgBrch_v6_lowres_0904.pdf .

To prove the L-ATV's diesel-electric, hybrid off-road credibility, in 2011 Oshkosh raced two such vehicles in Baja 1000 – see https://oshkoshdefense.com/events/score-baja-1000-celebration-event-1/ , http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/threads/52081-OshKosh-Vehicles-Racing-Baja-1000 , http://www.autoblog.com/2010/11/28/video-oshkosh-light-concept-vehicle-competes-in-baja-1000/ , http://green.autoblog.com/photos/oshkosh-extreme-racing-light-concept-vehicle/full/ , http://www.dieselpowermag.com/events/1103dp_oshkosh_attacks_the_baja_1000/?__federated=1 , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baja_1000 , https://www.facebook.com/Tecate.SCORE.Baja.1000 , http://score-international.com , http://score-international.com/2013-baja-1000-course-maps/ , http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/40091000/highlight/428292 , http://jalopnik.com/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-2013-baja-1000-1464136838 , http://www.trx450r.org/forum/92-lou...pics-about-tecate-score-baja-1000-2011-a.html , http://www.trx450r.org/forum/92-lou...cs-about-tecate-score-baja-1000-2011-a-2.html , http://www.trx450r.org/forum/92-lou...cs-about-tecate-score-baja-1000-2011-a-3.html , and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baja_California_peninsula :









**************************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*************************************************






.


*************************************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*************************************************






[video=youtube;_ufskxHysJM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ufskxHysJM [/video] [video=youtube;CcpLIky0zGg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcpLIky0zGg [/video]


This particular L-ATV had a 400hp 6.6L Duramax engine built by Gale Banks Engineering – see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gale_Banks_Engineering , http://www.bankspower.com/galesinsi...l-Army-Goes-Behind-The-Scenes-With-Gale-Banks , http://www.duramaxdiesels.com/forum/showthread.php?t=27943 . This drove a generator that seemed to produce 70 KW of electricity, although perhaps this figure is a bit low? Both vehicles finished the race without getting stuck even once. But one vehicle got a DNF for not crossing a checkpoint within the required time – see http://www.dieselbombers.com/general-diesel-related/70039-oshkosh-attacks-baja-1000-a.html.

Note that although this particular Oshkosh hybrid vehicle is a 4x4, Oskosh has implemented its "Propulse" diesel-electric solution on a variety of vehicle platforms, including the 8x8 HEMMT, and the 6x6 MTVR truck. For further discussion and abundant links, see post #334 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page34 .

Again, this is a simply huge area of potential discussion, and will no doubt occupy many, many more pages in this thread. Furthermore, this is truly "virgin territory", because as near as I can tell, so far there has been very little discussion on web forums of off-road hybrid technologies applied to expedition motorhomes. For instance, there has been almost no discussion of hybrid technologies for overlanding here on ExPo. This here thread is it, at least so far.

So any and all of your thoughts on the topic of hybrid overlanding will be greatly appreciated. You and others who are willing to "think out loud" about hybrid technology for expedition motorhomes will be pioneers.



*************************************************


6. The Type and Power Output of the Range-Extending Generator Still to be Determined


*************************************************

Small diesel engine 4 cylinder between 2 and 3 litres 300HP
Euro 6 exhaust emission class with ad blue.

The engine size necessary is debatable. For instance in the L-ATV hybrid prototype shown above, the engine only drove an electric generator. And yet it was still a 6.6 L engine that produced 400 HP.

Honestly, I don't know what to think on this score. The Capstone 35 KW microturbines first used in the New York pilot project buses were underpowered, for instance. So they replaced them by Capstone 65 KW generators. And in the concept truck that Capstone developed with Peterbilt and Walmart, they used a 65 KW generator right from the beginning.

Here it is worth noting that the the “Jepotnik” diesel flywheel generator that egn recommended earlier in the thread, puts out no less than 120 KW -- see http://www.jenoptik.com/Internet_EN_822LHH_Profile , http://www.jenoptik.com/en_40173_adsf263 and http://www.jenoptik.com/cms/product...BD728/$File/esw_euro5_apu_120kw_2012.pdf?Open :







This is a generator specifically designed for large hybrid applications, i.e. buses, and it is currently installed in trolley buses in Germany.

The diesel engine used in the Jeptonik generator is a 6-cylinder, 3.2 L "Type M160015-0", an engine that appears to be manufactured by Steyr -- see http://powertransmissionguide.net/c/c.aspx/STE001/productspecs , http://www.steyr-motors.com , http://www.steyr-motors.com/automotive/ , http://www.steyr-motors.com/automotive/engines/diesel-engine-6-cylinder-3200-cm3-m16/ , and. http://www.steyr-motors.com/automotive/applications-gallery/ :






The power output of this Steyr diesel engine is 135 KW, or 182 HP, and seems to be the same as the engine used, for instance, in the Humvee, the BAE Land Systems RG32, the Jamma M16 TCI, the Urovesa VAM TAC M16 TCI, and of course in MAN Neoplan hybrid trolley buses -- see http://www.steyr-motors.com/automotive/applications-gallery/am-general-hmmw-m998-m16-tca-hd-164/ , http://www.steyr-motors.com/automotive/applications-gallery/bae-land-systems-omc-rg32-m16-tci-165/ , http://www.steyr-motors.com/automotive/applications-gallery/force-protection-jamma-m16-tci-177/ , http://www.steyr-motors.com/automotive/applications-gallery/urovesa-vam-tac-m16-tci-156/ , and http://www.steyr-motors.com/automotive/applications-gallery/neoman-modena-m16-tci-187/ .

In other words, although the power output of the Jepotnik generator may seem exceptionally large (120 KW), it seems to obtain this power from a comparatively "small" engine, of the kind typically used in light-vehicle military applications; an engine that produces only 185 HP.....


*************************************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*************************************************


Remarkably, the Jepotnik generator set weighs just 350 kg, which compares very favorably with the typical weights of 20 KW diesel generators installed in motorhomes. I haven't done that much research into turbocharged diesel generators, whether for stand-alone use as an APU in a motorhome, or installed as range-extenders in hybrid solutions. But one of the most interesting products I've come across so far, is the Whisper Power M-GV 50 – see http://www.whisperpower.com/4/21/products/generator-systems-(high-power).html , http://www.whisperpower.com/4/21/161/products/generator-systems-(high-power)/m-gv-50-genverter.html , http://www.whisperpower.com/phpimg/wp_product_download_1cb62b18531caa25015_0a_d-gv-50-datasheet.pdf , and http://www.whisperpower.com/4/2/products/generators-(programmable-rpm).html :





The Whisper Power M-GV 50 is a variable RPM generator that produces a whopping 33 to 50 KW, and yet weighs "only" 400 kg. This is roughly the same as a Cummins generator that is not turbocharged, and that produces only 20 KW – see http://power.cummins.com/onanpowerWeb/navigation.do?pageId=533&parentId=532&linkName=Generator Sets and http://power.cummins.com/onanpowerW...tId=533&linkName=Commercial Diesel Generators . Turbo-charged Kohler generators also weigh more than the WhisperPower. For instance, the 33 KW and 44 KW Kohler turbocharged models both weigh 535 kg. For further discussion and links, see post #35 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...BEST-High-Altitude-Solution-for-Heating/page4 .

So compared to these, the Jeptonik is an ultra-lightweight powerhouse. 120 KW of power, an just 300 kg!

But again, I really don't know how much power is actually "necessary". In many hybrid vehicles where diesels are used as range-extenders, automotive engineers have found that they can use a much smaller, two or four cylinder engine to power the generator, because they no longer need the HP and torque of a larger engine for "peak power". The energy stored in the batteries, and the instant-full-torque of electric motors, takes care of "peak power" needs. So the diesel generator can be optimized to be as small and fuel efficient as possible; as small as will prove necessary to produce range-extending electricity.

In short, maybe a generator with a 120 KW power output like the Jepotnik is necessary; maybe not. I honestly don't know. I only know that Oshkosh installed a 6.6 L, 400 HP engine in the L-ATV, and not something smaller. And that hybrid trolley buses in Germany use the Jepotnik.....

Clearly, more information, many more examples, and much more engineering discussion is needed, before this matter could be decided.


*************************************************


7. Multi-Fuel Capable Engine? Conventional Rod-and-Piston Diesel, or Microturbine?


*************************************************

Euro 6 exhaust emission class with ad blue.

There is also the question of multi-fuel capability, which is one of the reasons why from pages 50 onwards in this thread we began discussing microturbine generators as a possible range-extending power source. Could a Euro 6 engine of the kind you specified, fuel up with high-sulfur-content diesel, which is sometimes the only kind of diesel available in certain parts of the world?

Note that in the pdf flyer posted above from Steyr Motors, Steyr advertises that it also makes "multi-fuel" engines for military applications. My reasoning in this thread has been that if globally capable military vehicles need multi-fuel, then an RTW expedition motorhome will portably need multi-fuel, too. But maybe I am wrong about this?


*************************************************


8. Full Serial Hybrid, and Definitely not Parallel Hybrid


*************************************************

Central engine on one side in front of axle2
Diesel propulsion only on the central axle (=permanent 6x2)
Central axle eventualy portal type only diesel propulsion
Electrical range and traction extender on first and last axle.

This is interesting. Here you seem to be suggesting that a parallel hybrid solution might still be preferred, in which a diesel engine still drives at least one axle directly?

For what it's worth, with only a few exceptions (for instance, the MillenWorks Light Utility Vehicle or "LUV"), almost all of the hybrid prototypes developed by the U.S. military over the last decade have been serial hybrids, not parallel hybrids. There seem to be very good reasons for this. For a really interesting recent paper (2012) that advocates “no half measures”, and full serial hybrid or IHED – “In-Hub Electric Drive” – for all U.S. Army vehicles, see http://www.benning.army.mil/armor/e...012/SEP_OCT/Articles/DuVall_Hoeltzel_SO12.pdf and http://www.benning.army.mil/armor/eARMOR/content/issues/2012/SEP_OCT/DuVall_Hoeltzel.html .

Here is a long quote from the article. Wherever it writes “IHED”, just substitute “Serial Hybrid”:

The IHED [i.e. a serial hybrid solution] consists of a diesel engine that drives a generator that provides electric power to wheel motors (mounted inside the wheel hub with a gearbox) that provides motive power to the tires, eliminating the entire mechanical drive train. The e-drive can be augmented (the optional hybrid portion) with a battery pack and battery-power converter, providing power for burst acceleration, periods of silent watch (six to 12 hours), silent movement (up to 20 miles on level terrain), power recovery/storage from regenerative braking, a second source of power and mobile-power-generation capability with an uninterrupted power source.

What does IHED provide vs. conventional mechanical drive? It provides very large quantities of electric power for on- vehicle and export uses. These include communications; navigation; command, control, communications, computers and intelligence / battlefield information; reconnaissance-surveillance-targeting; sensors; unmanned aerial vehicle / unmanned ground vehicle control; electric-powered weapons; electric armor and countermeasures; electric tools; and portable-device battery recharge. It also augments/eliminates trailer-mounted generators.

IHED improves system reliability. The total system-parts count is greatly reduced by 30 percent to 45 percent. (If it isn't on the vehicle, it can't break or fail.) E-drive has very few friction points and some bearings on shafts; all else are magnetically coupled – no friction, no heat, no wear points…..

IHED increases mobility because having no half-shafts allows uncomplicated, very large wheel travel. The suspension increases cross-country speed, reduces crew/vehicle fatigue and increases weapons effectiveness and survivability. IHED raises the vehicle's ground clearance by eliminating the mechanical drive train and, in many cases, increases stability and safety. It also provides for computer-controlled all-wheel traction control, anti-lock braking system and stability control.

IHED improves logistics and reduces the expeditionary footprint. Analyses based on Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, testing shows that a reduction in fuel consumption of greater than 40 percent is possible. The longer silent-watch periods reduce fuel use as well as increasing survivability and stealth. On an IHED system, all wheel stations and supporting electronics are common parts, reducing system-part count and spares by eliminating the mechanical drive train (for example, greater than 42 percent less line-replaceable units on the e-drive Stryker vs. the present Stryker).

IHED can lower system lifecycle costs 40 percent to 50 percent based on the United Kingdom's Future Rapid Effects System Study, which com- pared the Light Armored Vehicle III to an 8x8 IHED vehicle. Reliability is raised by eliminating so many parts and using proven electric technology. IHED's modular nature provides easy upgrade when enhanced or new technology appears. IHED also allows the system designer to easily integrate the drive system and exploit a family-of-vehicles concept. It simplifies and reduces maintenance workload and times (fewer parts). It reduces training for operators and maintainers (system simplicity and commonality, not complexity).

The high-wheel travel suspension allows the vehicle to move at greater speed over broken terrain while keeping crew ride within a tolerable level. The addition of an active component keeps the wheel in contact with the ground for greater periods of time, increasing driver control of change of direction and braking. It will also provide energy recovery that can be put back into the power-budget system. The new tread patterns being applied to military tires, coupled with a CTIS, have led to dramatic increases in wheeled-vehicle mobility.

Several IHED 4x4 vehicles have under- gone testing at Aberdeen Proving Grounds. They also have a number of user evaluations from Regular Army and Marine units, as well as Special Operations Forces, at Yuma Proving Grounds and Fort Benning, GA. Test reports have confirmed that vehicles equipped in the manner described have much greater mobility than current vehicles……

Having participated in all the demonstrations of these vehicles, the authors heard experienced tracked-vehicle officers from the U.S. Army, Canada, Great Britain, Germany and Australia state that they had been driven in IHED vehicles across terrain they wouldn't have tried with their tracked vehicles.


No half-measures

The benefits are many, but beware of those who would take half-measures. Adding a generator and replacing a drop- box or differential with a motor in the mistaken belief it reduces risk is incorrect. If the electric system is layered over the mechanical system, all the mechanical system's drawbacks and weaknesses are still there. The risk factor has gone up, not down. The Humvee is an example; all four half-shafts are different and are the mechanical fuse in the system. They break to save more expensive parts from breaking. The SOF teams informed the authors that they take four or five sets of half- shafts with them because they break so often.

If an electric motor is substituted for the differential, the half-shaft problem remains. In the world of reliability, the numbers would not get better – they would get worse. IHED drive trains are magnetically coupled and can't break; a strong gearbox can take punishment, as this magnetic coupling feature provides protection. Eliminating the mechanical system for an IHED drive train reduces the number of LRU 30 percent to 45 percent; if an LRU is not on the vehicle, it can't break or fail.
So the question is, with so many compel- ling benefits, why hasn't IHED been put into military service? The answer, up to recently, has been performance risk and lack of an adequate production base. The remaining technical risk of electromagnetic-impulse compatibility has been successfully addressed in recent component/ subsystem-level qualification testing.

The final barrier to production and fielding of IHED is availability of an adequate U.S. production base. This barrier is being rapidly eliminated with substantial U.S. investment in electric traction motors, power electronics and battery-production facilities for hybrid electric cars. This production base will very soon accommodate military needs with a minimum of investment and risk, and will provide enough competition at the component level to assure affordability.

Anyone interested in hybrid solutions for large expedition vehicles should read this article in full. It is simply terrific.


*************************************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*************************************************


9. Speed and Tires


*************************************************

Top speed 140km/h tires
Low profile tires like XZL or XZY3 type 395/55R20
Normal driving speed layout for 100km/h green zone

This all sounds good. But read what egn just wrote about XZL tires. Apparently they are not so good for on-road driving, and positively dangerous in some situations. So egn now uses Conti HCS tires instead.

Also tires may be switched, depending on application. For instance, in soft sand Michelin XS tires are preferred to XZL. So all that really needs to be considered, from a design and engineering standpoint, is that the wheel arches will have enough room to handle the maximum tire size. This may be 14.00 R20, or it may be 16.00 R20. The wheel arches will also need enough space to handle the addition of tire-protection chains, as suggested by egn.

Also quite important is CTIS, or "central tire inflation system".


*************************************************


10. Torsion-Free Chassis an Absolute Requirement


*************************************************

Total weight, filled and ready to go 16 tons
Weight repartition front axle +/- 30%, central axle 40%, back axle +/-30%

Keeping the weight down is very important. But also very important -- critically important, in fact -- is that the chassis-frame should not twist, and that it should be torsion-free. This basic requirement is stated clearly in the title of the thread: "Torsion-Free Frame". Without a torsion-free frame, a fully integrated design becomes almost impossible. So this basic requirement may then necessitate the extra weight that a Tatra 815 or MAN SX-44 chassis frame entails.

In other words, a torsion-free chassis is an absolute, non-negotiable requirement, no matter what the weight.

However, with that point made crystal clear, as near as I can tell there is no significant difference in weight between a Zetros 6x6 chassis, and a completely new Tatra 815 6x6 “Phoenix” chassis. See post #84 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...xpedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page9 , and see grizzlyj’s reply in post #85. However, the Zetros 6x6 chassis twists and bends, whereas the Tatra 815 chassis is completely torsion-free. As such, it is possible to build a fully integrated motorhome on top of the Tatra chassis, but not on top of a Zetros chassis. And yet the Tatra will weigh no more than the Zetros.

Lots of expedition motorhomes now exist based on the Zetros 6x6 chassis. So why not a fully integrated expedition motorhome based on a Tatra 815 6x6 “Phoenix” chassis that does not twist? Especially if it weighs the same as a 6x6 Zetros? If Zetros 6x6 expedition motorhomes are justifiable, then a Tatra 815 6x6 expedition motorhome will be justifiable, too.


*************************************************


11. Battery Pack: Lithium-Ion, or Ultra-Capacitors?


*************************************************

Lithium battery propulsion pack 1000 -1200 kg probably 400VDC
Cooling and heating loop on this inside battery pack

Yes and yes. Again, these are the engineering details to be worked out, as we think through what a truly robust off-road serial hybrid system might look like.

However, here I should note that Oshkosh's "Propulse" system uses ultra-capacitors instead of Lithium-Ion batteries. For some introductory information about ultra-capacitors, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_double-layer_capacitor , http://www.economist.com/node/10601407 , https://gigaom.com/2011/07/12/how-ultracapacitors-work-and-why-they-fall-short/ , http://www.ioxus.com/ultracapacitors/ , http://www.ioxus.com/ultracapacitors/ , http://www.maxwell.com/products/ultracapacitors/industries/consumer-products , http://www.maxwell.com/products/ultracapacitors/industries/automotive , and http://www.maxwell.com/products/ultracapacitors/products/k2-series .

I know literally nothing about ultra-capacitors, or why Oshkosh uses them, and why they might be preferable to Lithium-Ion batteries. Clearly, a topic for future research and discussion.


*************************************************


12. -50°C to +50°C Climate Range, and 5500 m Altitude Range


*************************************************

Vehicle environment conditions from -40°C to +50°C

This is reasonably accurate, because a true "RTW" motorhome should not only be 4-season, it should be able to travel through Siberia in the middle of winter.

This is not just because I personally think that Arctic winters can be beautiful. It's also a matter of geographic access. Many roads in northern Canada and Siberia are "ice roads", roads that are only passable in the wintertime when everything freezes solid. During the summer the top level of permafrost in the Arctic turns to mush, and these same roads become unpassable muck. So Siberian communities are actually better connected during the winter than during the summer. During the summer they turn into islands surrounded by mushy permafrost that may as well be water.

But during the winter, Siberia gets cold, really cold. In many parts of Siberia -30°C is considered "mild" in the winter, and temperatures can and regularly do drop below -50°C. So a true RTW expedition motorhome needs a heating system that can work well and heat the cabin comfortably at -40°C . And on occasion it needs to be sufficient to handle extreme lows of -50°C . In other words, -40°C should not be thought of as "extreme" during a Siberian winter. Rather, -50°C is more like the extreme outlier temperature in Siberia.

This may seem a bit unbelievable. But it's discussed at length in the "Camper Thermal Engineering Thread", with plenty of links for reference, at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...old-amp-High-Altitude-Arctic-Antarctica-Tibet , and see post #66 in particular, at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...p-High-Altitude-Arctic-Antarctica-Tibet/page7.

As for altitude, this too is a critical requirement, because a true RTW expedition motorhome should be able to cross the Tibetan Plateau with ease. And the Tibetan plateau is high, really high. The Tibetan Plateau averages over 4500 m high, and many roads in Tibet have stretches that are higher than 5000 m.

The altitude requirement affects everything, from the kinds of heaters and kitchen appliances used, to the possibility of a slightly "pressurized" cabin, fed with enriched oxygen, as per Bombardier's passenger coaches on the Qinghai-Tibet Railway. Much of this has been already been discussed in this thread. See especially posts #412 - #435 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page42 , http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page43, and http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page44 . But of course, also see the "High Altitude Heating" thread, at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...s-the-BEST-High-Altitude-Solution-for-Heating , and see the "Camper Thermal Engineering for Extreme Cold & High Altitude" thread already mentioned.


*************************************************


13. A Fully Integrated Motorhome with Lots of Big, Thermally Advanced Windows


*************************************************

Big double glass front wind screen.
2 driver side windows identical layout
3 side windows on each side , wide and double thermic glass with gas and altitude approved up to 5000m with extra small frames on side windows, electric glass color changes posible.
Windows are optically improved

Clearly, you've been reading my musings about glass over in the Camper Thermal Engineering thread...... ....It would be great if double-pane windshields for motorhomes were now available. But this has to be researched further.

It would also be great to know what the R-value is for the huge front windshield in Burstner's new "Panorama" motorhome -- see http://www.buerstner.com/uk/motorhomes/integrated_models/grand_panorama.html and http://www.buerstner.com/uk/motorhomes/integrated_models/grand_panorama/360_views.html .








As for the side-windows, it would be even better if they were triple-pane ("triple-thermic") glass, although I don't know if triple-pane windows are available for motorhomes.

As for altitude, the motorhome's windows (and indeed, all of the motorhome's systems) need to be good for up to 18,000 feet, or 5,500 meters. Many Tibetan passes on important roads go that high. For instance, the Tanggula pass on the main north/south artery through Tibet, the G109, has an altitude of 5,231 m -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanggula_Pass , http://www.economist.com/news/china...ross-tibetan-plateau-some-reaching-lhasa-road , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G6_Beijing–Lhasa_Expressway , and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_National_Highway_109 .

Note that KCT claims in its PDF that its windows can "withstand heights up to 7000 m" -- see http://www.kctechnik.com/en/index.html and http://www.kctechnik.com/en/catalogue.pdf .


*************************************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*************************************************


14. Wall, Roof, and Floor Thickness?


*************************************************

Body insulation 60mm all-round except windows and hatches.

My only remaining question here is whether the roof and floors should be even thicker than 6 cm; see my most recent comment in the Camper Thermal Engineering thread. Perhaps 10 cm for the roof, 14 cm for the floors?

But only if this would make a significant thermal difference.


*************************************************


15. Maximal Solar Panel Coverage


*************************************************

Flat solar panels maximal roof size + on the hatches

Yes.

Also, thin-film roll-up solar cells on the awnings:




*************************************************


16. Slide-Outs and Pop-Ups


*************************************************

Pop out roof on the captain’s bedroom (100kg extra)
Side pop out on the lounge area (150kg extra)

Slide-outs have not been discussed yet, but sure.....:wings:

As for Pop-Ups, I was thinking of something rather more ambitious: basically, a full-length equivalent of the UniCat pop-up......

See the discussion earlier in the thread.


*************************************************


17. No Garage in Back. A Drop-Down Deck Instead.


*************************************************

Garage in the back with electrical hatchback (+200kg)

Actually, in the design that I am working on, the back of the motorhome will have a very large fold-down deck, as per Rob Gray's Wothahellizat, the Country Coach Verandah, or Knaus-Tabbert's Caravisio. See the page 14 and 15 in this thread, posts #139 to #141, at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page14 and http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page15 .

In other words, no garage in back.....

This rear deck will descend by means of a "cantilever" lift. A motorcycle in back will also be carried on a different and separate column lift, with the rails of the column lift running around the deck. This has not been discussed much yet in the thread, but my next major series of posts will address just this. Yes, it can work mechanically......

Otherwise, more local "run-about" transportation could be provided by towed Jeep, as Peter Thompson's solution when traveling the Australian Outback with Mañana. This was already addressed in the Camper Thermal Engineering thread, and so too in this thread on page 28, post #276, at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page28 .

Now for thermic purposes, there is then the not so small matter of a row of sliding glass windows running along the back of the vehicle, just like the Carvisio or the Country Coach Verandah. I had not yet gotten around to that part of the description of window requirements in the thermal engineering thread. But will complete the post with the necessary information tomorrow. This will be my most "extreme" window requirement, so I was leaving it to last, for dramatic effect.


*************************************************


18. Range-Extending Generator Redundancy?


*************************************************

No extra diesel genset but possibility to use the driving engine for stationary electricity and cooling.

Actually, it might be desirable to have an extra genset as secondary backup....?

But agreed, if it's a serial hybrid, a hybrid in which a diesel engine acts only as a electricity-generator, then this may seem a bit redundant. On the other hand, if a microturbine generator were used instead of a diesel, then a pair of microturbines might be desirable, so that one will always be available just in case the other one fails? Again, for microturbines, read from page 50 onwards in this thread (standard Expo pagination) -- see http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page50 .


*************************************************


19. A Vehicle for Slow Travel, that does not need to be Air-Transporatable


*************************************************

Side walls in C130 transport shape (only upper top)

Interesting idea, but probably not. This would cut down on camper space, storage up high inside the camper, etc.

The "TerraLiner" (one possible name for this project.....) will be a vehicle for those who have the time and leisure to explore the whole planet, from end to end, for years. Ergo, no need for air transport. The TerraLiner will travel between continents by boat, not C130. It's the Journey that counts, not the reaching the destination quickly by air-drop.

The TerraLiner will not be a vehicle for speed demons. It will not be a vehicle for those whose idea of great overlanding is covering as much mileage in as few days as possible.

Are you familiar with the distinction between "traveling" versus "sojourning"? Sojourning is slow-travel. Sojourning is the kind of travel where simply being in a new culture, a new climate, a new ecosystem, is the goal. Not racking up overlanding miles.

But still campo, if you think there are good arguments to be made for C130 air-transportability, I'd love to hear them!


*************************************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.

 

[biotect]

.
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

*************************************************


20. Curvilinear Design


*************************************************

Design straight lines with rounded edges.

Actually, more like curves everywhere, with only occasional straight bits.....:sombrero:

I love curvilinear Art Deco design from the 1930's and 1940's. And I dislike the opposite: boxy-rectilinear "Kombat Kamping" brutalism. I also generally don't like the"wedge" aesthetic that began to dominate automotive design in the late 1970's and 1980's. My general stance tends to be that most automotive design from roughly 1970 to 2000 was worthless. See the series of posts about the R2 Tatra-based rover used in Ridley Scott's movie, "Aliens", from page 58 onwards in this thread, beginning with post #573 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page58.

Or just read all of page 57, in which I wax poetic about the design wonder that was the original VW "Kombi" Microbus camper -- see http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page57 . The original VW Kombi is my idea of terrific design. Unfortunately, by the end of the 20th century this kind of organic, curvilinear, biomorphic design that communicates personality and "soul", almost became a lost art. But happily, wind-tunnel testing is now driving an aesthetic revival of Art Deco sensibility, if only because the drag coefficients of curvilinear vehicles are so much better.


*************************************************


21. Retro-Futuristic Design


*************************************************


In answer to this question of design aesthetics, I composed another long, monumental series of posts reflecting on the genius of the 1930's-era BMW 328 Kamm Coupé: how BMW both resurrected the original Coupé, and drew contemporary design inspiration from the same. If I have time in the next few months, I will try posting it.

For now, see http://www.wired.com/2011/04/0428bmw-sweeps-mille-miglia/all/ , http://www.europeanceo.com/culture/2011/03/a-victory-of-passion-and-precision/ , http://www.supercars.net/cars/4873.html , http://www.supercars.net/Gallery?cmd=viewCarGallery&carID=4873&pgID=1 , http://www.dieselstation.com/BMW/328-Kamm-Coupe/BMW-328-Kamm-Coupe-wallpaper-ds15-i2655.html , http://www.seriouswheels.com/cars/1940-1949/top-1940-BMW-328-Kamm-Coupe.htm , http://www.netcarshow.com/bmw/1940-328_kamm_coupe/ , http://www.netcarshow.com/bmw/1940-328_kamm_coupe/1600x1200/wallpaper_01.htm , http://www.sueddeutsche.de/auto/bmw-kamm-coupe-aus-alt-mach-neu-1.937413 , http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u= http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sueddeutsche.de%2Fauto%2Fbmw-kamm-coupe-aus-alt-mach-neu-1.937413 , and http://www.sueddeutsche.de/auto/bmw-kamm-coupe-aus-alt-mach-neu-1.934728 .

The original Kamm Coupé was consigned to the scrap heap in the 1950's, after its owner had an accident. But the BMW 328 and the Kamm Coupé version specifically is so important to BMW's corporate identity and institutional memory, that BMW had a completely new replica fabricated by hand, which it first showed to the general public at the "Concorso D'Eleganza" on lake Como in 2010:





*************************************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST
.