There's an interesting article in Jalopnik about how cars would look if instead of the integrated bodies that they are, they had been manufactured separately as engines and carbodies, in analogy with the separation between the horse and the buggy.
WI: carbodies and engines were separate
- Thread starter Alon
- Start date
Driftless
Donor
In a way that concept does exist for trucks. Not as completely separate units, but with engine, drive train, frame, often with a cab but not always. You start with that base and configure the rest modular fashion on the type of work to be done.
You should be able to work a similar concept with a car easily enough. Though that idea went out the window with unibody construction
You should be able to work a similar concept with a car easily enough. Though that idea went out the window with unibody construction
A very interesting article, and it certainly would have advantages.
My father lost a whole truck to an engine fire, some type of emergency engine release and pushing them apart could have saved it.
This would really help farming if you can move an engine between vehicles and farm equipment.
I wonder what it would mean for auto safety if the engine and body break apart in a wreck instead of crumpling into each other?
I don't think the oldest engine designs would go away, I can see a market even today for engines that can attach to animal drawn wagons and farm equipment.
My father lost a whole truck to an engine fire, some type of emergency engine release and pushing them apart could have saved it.
This would really help farming if you can move an engine between vehicles and farm equipment.
I wonder what it would mean for auto safety if the engine and body break apart in a wreck instead of crumpling into each other?
I don't think the oldest engine designs would go away, I can see a market even today for engines that can attach to animal drawn wagons and farm equipment.
Last edited:
Granddad, to the day he died, ran his farm with a tractor+. Tractor + combine, Tractor + swather, Tractor + bailer, Tractor +...
So the engine was in the tractor, and the machinery it pulled ran by power take off. All his neighbours had gone to self propelled combines, but he didn't.
So, your 'separate engine' is a tractor. That what farmers used into the 60s (and some of them beyond).
For some of my motorhead friends back in the day motors were effectively seperate. They would swap engine as casually as most people have their tires changed. I recall one who sold a muscle car with a high performance engine, the buyer to return the next morning with the money. Between supper & the ten oclock news the seller pulled the race engine & installed a factory stock motor. Painting it to match along the way. Gotta love quick disconnects & a good set of tools.
This is still the case for many 4WD owners, especially the older models without ECU/EFI systems. I myself have never changed an engine over, but I've helped mates out changing suspension systems and in one case changing an IFS setup in a Toyota 4Runner to a solid axle.
A horse and buggy is pretty much the equivalent of a truck and trailer. Except the driver sits in the truck now. If the driver were to sit in the trailer it seems like it would be a lot of hassle to have connections for steering, throttle, brakes, etc. going from the trailer to the motor unit. This was much easier with a horse since the horse was actually doing the steering and throttle/brake and the driver just needed reigns to guide the horse. having a bunch of mechanical connections seems like a lot of extra engineering and chances for things to break with no benefit if the vehicle is just going to be a passenger car which stays together over its life.
Most people have no need or desire to have a separate motor unit and driver/passenger unit. In the example of a farm tractor using the PTO to power various equipment makes sense since the farmer can use one tractor to power all his equipment depending on the day's work. And the tractor and all the equipment can be replaced separately.
I would think even if the first vehicles were built with separate motor and driver/passenger units it wouldn't be long before someone got the idea it would make sense to combine them together.
Most people have no need or desire to have a separate motor unit and driver/passenger unit. In the example of a farm tractor using the PTO to power various equipment makes sense since the farmer can use one tractor to power all his equipment depending on the day's work. And the tractor and all the equipment can be replaced separately.
I would think even if the first vehicles were built with separate motor and driver/passenger units it wouldn't be long before someone got the idea it would make sense to combine them together.
It would, I think, take all of fifteen seconds for someone to say 'hey, why don't we put the driver on the motor unit, and get rid of these complex linkages?'
After that, it wouldn't take much longer for the rest of the trailing unit to migrate on to the motor unit. The independent tractor/trailer combination might persist in some cases - I can just about see it making sense for rural folks to have a single motor unit that they hitch to a pickup body for running to market, or to a passenger body for taking the family to church, but otherwise the flexibility gained won't justify the additional cost.
