Jalopnik 
Enter your username and password.
-
posts about #covini more → Six-Wheeled Covini C6W Heading To Production
Detroit, 4:03 AM
Mon Dec 7
12 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
Editor-in-Chief:
Ray Wert | | AIM
Road Test Editor:
Wes Siler |
Weekend Editor:
Murilee Martin |
Associate Editor - Houston:
Associate Editor - Detroit:
Editor-at-Large:
Contributors:
John Krewson |
| posts about #covini more → |
Six-Wheeled Covini C6W Heading To Production |
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
12/10/08
12/10/08
I predict lashings of understeer.
12/10/08
12/10/08
Now, an old F1 experimental (ala the Brabham BT46B and Chaparral 2J) idea I'd like to see in a road car is vacuum created downforce.
Maybe they can combine this and 6WD to create the most grippy car ever.
It would look hideous, but it would be fun to comment on. Maybe even fun to drive.
12/10/08
12/10/08
12/10/08
12/10/08
12/10/08
History is more or less bunk. It's tradition. We don't want tradition. We want to live in the present and the only history that is worth a tinker's damn is the history we make today.
Henry Ford
12/10/08
12/10/08
12/10/08
Man, I'll bet the guys at Discount Tire get wood every time they see one of these multi-wheel monsters.
12/10/08
12/10/08
12/10/08
"Why's it got 6 wheels?"
"Well, uh, it's uh, better for uh,..."
12/10/08
12/10/08
Hammond: This... is the Covini C6W. It's the world's first road-legal six wheeled car. That makes it unique, which makes it cool.
Clarkson: No, it doesn't.
Hammond: What else on the road has six wheels? It's a conversation piece!
Clarkson: So you drive up to a dinner party, park it out front, and people start to talk about it...
Hammond: Yes! Exactly!
Clarkson: ...and then someone asks you: why's it got six wheels?
Hammond: Well, uh, I uh, it, it improves... uhh...
12/10/08
What a 'tard...
12/10/08
12/10/08
12/10/08
A road legal Tyrell P34.
12/10/08
Yeah, ok. So because there is a small chance of tire failure you're going to want to add a relatively large number of additional parts which could fail catastrophically.
2) "Less risk of aquaplaning"?
No. Less weight over greater surface area means MORE risk of hydroplaning.
3) "Better braking".
Probably, but 6 piston Brembo brakes on big ass rotors should be more than sufficient. Too much brake power and you're gonna' lose grip anyhow.
4) "Better comfort"?
Say what now?
5) "Better absorption of frontal impact"?
Why? Because you have more metal there? Add a fucking crumple zone.
Frankly #2 has me really worried about the design of the thing. If the designer can't figure out basic hydrodynamics then I don't trust anything he's going to build.
Why not just market it honestly and say "It looks neato!"
12/10/08
You are correct that less weight over greater surface increases the likely hood of aquaplaning... but think about it a bit differently for just a moment if you would...
The front tire is cutting through standing water. The second front tire is directly behind, so it is MUCH more likely to have solid contact with the road. You would probably need to be driving stupid fast to get all four front tires to aquaplane. I could be wrong here, but I really think the front tires would clear water while the rear front (wtf?!) tires would provide good contact.
12/10/08
If you add more contact patch, though, then you consequently increase the amount of friction you can generate with the road, and should be able to significantly shorten braking distances.
12/10/08
Would the suspension ration need to be tweaked on the front rear wheel set, I wonder?
12/10/08
12/10/08
2 wheels = bad
6 wheels =too bad
12/10/08
12/10/08
12/10/08
12/10/08
Imagine what fun you'll have drivng down the street in your Covini C6W and listening to the admiring cries of passerby yelling, "Photoshop!"