I was thinking maybe we could get a few guys together to fund getting the bodyshells made professionally. I made some enquiries a while ago about making a D-type shell and it wasn't expensive. I think the mould would be about 5k and the bodies about 3k each.
Grille I'd use secondhand genuine as someone suggested. You could make in fibreglass and get chromed but it would not be easy. I've tried moulding the headlamp covers in perspex but its too easy to overheat. Polycarbonate is the way to go. Secondhand headlamp rims are a lot easier than making. You would have to make iniside and outside separately and weld down the outer edge. I ended up buying the moulded covers and fitting my old rims - which was a lot cheaper than getting the things complete.
One could actually make a platform chassis very similar to the original very cheaply using similar size box sections for the centre chassis rails and sills. All the panels apart from the diff housing and rear wheel arches are single curvature or flat so easy to build with a jig. My car is totally stripped to the bare steel chassis so ideal to make a jig from. You can buy the jacking points and cross members complete as a repair part. Jag suspension will take 52mm Jag hubs and Jag or Aston wires. Side 1/4 windows are curved but you could do them flat in glass, use secondhand or make curved in polycarbonate. Brake master cyl goes under the floor and the bracketry would need making from scratch. The correct master cyl is exoensive but you could use a MkX one and sleeve down. Bumpers would be expensive even secondhand. Dash could be made in fibreglass. Seats could be made from scratch but not simple. Leather trim would be expensive.
Greyhound
A pleasure to meet you on this forum Greyhound. Very interested in photos of your project. I have seen photos of the massive DB5 chassis in plate steel. You are dead on...not really difficult to copy the chassis...with an original to take measures from, or blueprints...as the sections seem to be mostly flat, or without compound curves. I believe the chassis were build at the David Brown tractor factory...and it shows...really overbuilt for its intended purpose. If a somewhat accurate replica were to be constructed, I would tend to try to lighten up the chassis where possible, thinner steel or even...aluminum ?
I see your point about the headlight rims...are they a matched pair, as mirror images, or identical to each other. They do seem complex to make... are the originals polished aluminum ? or chromed steel ? Front and rear bumpers...ebay...in stainless...they do look good, a little pricey. They would be very difficult to make. Used bits and pieces of DB5s are simply not available in North America...some very nice reproduction pieces on Ebay from the States $.
It must have been a nightmare removing the aluminum body panels from the car. Interested in the process that you used.
In North America there are many xj6 from the mid 70s and up to choose from, and lots of rough, to very rough xj-s with V12s that people have just given up on. Mostly convertibles, alway automatics Rust is often an issue, and the complexity and fuel costs of the V12 I guess.
My present thinking is...I really like the IRS jag rear and the inline 6 platform of the xj-s and I am beginning to see advantages to using mostly Jaguar mechanicals with this project as you suggest. IRS for the rear suspension, not original but better...and the xk inline 6 is really not that different to Marek's inline 6 except for the alloy vs cast iron weight difference. However, the front and rear track of the xj-s is quite a bit wider than the DB5s..I don't know if this is due to the rim width, offset, etc. But if the hub ends are within an inch or so, I think the rims could be spec to deal with that issue. Dayton seems to be able to make anything you want...for a price. )
The xj-s wheel base is 102 inches...DB5 is 98. At the present I am not sure how to deal with the 4 inch difference. I have not examined a xj-s from below, but I am pretty sure it is not a body on frame construction...unibody...perhaps with some frame connectors ? I dislike shortening the structure of a unibody car...seems to be too much work for too little payoff.
I have never worked with polycarbonate before, seems like a little bit of practice is necessary to get it right. Looking forward to discussing your project further.
Greyhound
A pleasure to meet you on this forum Greyhound.
Likewise DB5Guy
Very interested in photos of your project. I have seen photos of the massive DB5 chassis in plate steel. You are dead on...not really difficult to copy the chassis...with an original to take measures from, or blueprints...as the sections seem to be mostly flat, or without compound curves. I believe the chassis were build at the David Brown tractor factory...and it shows...really overbuilt for its intended purpose.
not so - see below
If a somewhat accurate replica were to be constructed, I would tend to try to lighten up the chassis where possible, thinner steel or even...aluminum ?
The DB5 is actually a really poor chassis design. The platform chassis has to be very heavily built to resist torsion and in spite of the ally body and superleggera support, the car is still very heavy.
A steel monocoque would be lighter and much more rigid. You couldn't save much weight on the chassis and retain torsional rigidity using the original design.
I see your point about the headlight rims...are they a matched pair, as mirror images, or identical to each other.
Identical
They do seem complex to make... are the originals polished aluminum ? or chromed steel ?
Early ally. late chromed brass
Front and rear bumpers...ebay...in stainless...they do look good, a little pricey. They would be very difficult to make. Used bits and pieces of DB5s are simply not available in North America...some very nice reproduction pieces on Ebay from the States $.
It must have been a nightmare removing the aluminum body panels from the car. Interested in the process that you used.
Cut the rear roof pillars through the fuel filler recesses and the outer sills at the rear wheelarch. The rear body can then be unscrewed. Forward half is cut at screen pillar bases and flanges
rolled back on A posts and round bonnet aperture.
In North America there are many xj6 from the mid 70s and up to choose from, and lots of rough, to very rough xj-s with V12s that people have just given up on. Mostly convertibles, alway automatics Rust is often an issue, and the complexity and fuel costs of the V12 I guess.
My present thinking is...I really like the IRS jag rear and the inline 6 platform of the xj-s and I am beginning to see advantages to using mostly Jaguar mechanicals with this project as you suggest. IRS for the rear suspension, not original but better...and the xk inline 6 is really not that different to Marek's inline 6 except for the alloy vs cast iron weight difference.
Because the ZF box is so heavy a Jag engine/box is probably lighter than the Aston engine/ZF
However, the front and rear track of the xj-s is quite a bit wider than the DB5s..I don't know if this is due to the rim width, offset, etc. But if the hub ends are within an inch or so, I think the rims could be spec to deal with that issue. Dayton seems to be able to make anything you want...for a price. )
The xj-s wheel base is 102 inches...DB5 is 98. At the present I am not sure how to deal with the 4 inch difference. I have not examined a xj-s from below, but I am pretty sure it is not a body on frame construction...unibody...perhaps with some frame connectors ?
Its monocoque but you'd really want the convertible for rigidity as you'd be using the fibreglass roof with only lightweight tube support.
I dislike shortening the structure of a unibody car...seems to be too much work for too little payoff.
Its not difficult - I've done it - but not on an XJS
I have never worked with polycarbonate before, seems like a little bit of practice is necessary to get it right. Looking forward to discussing your project further.
You have to heat the plastic to mould it and the polycarbonate is more tolerant of high temps. Really it should be vacuum formed but i tried it using a fibreglass buck and mould either side. You use cloth to prevent marking the plastic. Its not easy. However you can get it done professionally at considerable cost saving on the AM price.
Altering the track on an independent susp Jag is straightforward
using internal sleeves on the wishbones and external on the halfshafts. Using that setup would be easier than altering the track on a Mk2 axle and building the watts linkage and trailing arms for the live axle as per original Aston. Handling would be better of course. The Aston suffers from poor damping, roll and pitching and the Jag suspension would certainly be better in that respect.
I like the direction we are going here, and I thank you for your insight and sharing your knowledge.
I simply do not have the experience with olders Jaguars to know that you can narrow the track on IRS without messing up the suspension geometry, so I will go with your experience. The Wikipedia entry on the Jaguar IRS shows a few versions with different track widths for different applications...that is good to know. Can the front also be narrowed as well ?
I think I will order a Haynes manual on the xj-s (any good reference material that you would suggest?) to get to know the car better.
Your statement on the chassis design is interesting...what I meant by overbuilt was that the weight of that chassis was overkill...(I guess in a vain attempt build some sort of torsional rigidity) I wonder if AM actually tested these aspects of their cars then ? Perhaps...if the windshield didn't crack over deep potholes it was ok...lightly sprung car with lots of roll and pitch. As you say.
Without a doubt the convertible unibody/monocoque is the way to go. Lighter, much more rigid. When Jaguar designed the convertible xj-s I am certain that they reinforced the lower body structure. Maybe not as tight as the coupe but definitely the best choice for our purpose, and frankly much more available than the coupe over here in the Great White North. )
My approach would be to remove the mininum of structural steel from the xj-s and construct a steel tube frame that would be pre-fitted and then be glassed in during the body molding process, to specific pick-up points then welded to the xj-s inner body structure. This would aid in body alignment as well. Hell...if anybody is going to cut up a xj-s beater might as well shorten the wheel base by 4 inches at the same time. Get out the sawsall...but I really would want to do it with a plasma cutter I really need to look at the ratio and proportions from the front of the xj-s to the front door hinges and compare it with the DB5s...still lots to consider.
Good to know the Jaguar xk engine and transmission is lighter than the AM combo. Never seen a manual Jaguar gearbox here. Don't even know if they were available for the North American market for the xj-s or xj6 or any Jaguar except my x-type sport. Had a hard enough time finding a 930 transaxle for my Porsche project. Discussion of available gear ratios and final drive ratios is a subject to discuss in great depth...but not now.
I like the direction we are going here, and I thank you for your insight and sharing your knowledge.
I simply do not have the experience with olders Jaguars to know that you can narrow the track on IRS without messing up the suspension geometry, so I will go with your experience.
The half shafts have shims to alter the camber so you don't need to be hyper-accurate in cutting and welding.
The Wikipedia entry on the Jaguar IRS shows a few versions with different track widths for different applications...that is good to know. Can the front also be narrowed as well ?
A lot more difficult because if you narrow the subframe, you'd have to move the pick-up points.
I think I will order a Haynes manual on the xj-s (any good reference material that you would suggest?) to get to know the car better.
I think Haynes is OK cos its basically ripped off the factory manual anyway. I have the parts book I think, but certainly workshop manual for similar XJ 12 ( most mechanicals very similar) Also have all factory workshop manuals and parts books for pre 1975 jags
Your statement on the chassis design is interesting...what I meant by overbuilt was that the weight of that chassis was overkill...(I guess in a vain attempt build some sort of torsional rigidity)
(yes the latter was the plan - but it didn't work!)
I wonder if AM actually tested these aspects of their cars then ? Perhaps...if the windshield didn't crack over deep potholes it was ok...lightly sprung car with lots of roll and pitch. As you say.
Its the superleggera roof (not the ally) that cracks with the flexing. Its Reynolds 531 or similar so you can only braze it to repair.
Without a doubt the convertible unibody/monocoque is the way to go. Lighter, much more rigid. When Jaguar designed the convertible xj-s I am certain that they reinforced the lower body structure.
correct
Maybe not as light as the coupe but definitely the best choice for our purpose, and frankly much more available than the coupe over here in the Great White North. )
My approach would be to remove the mininum of structural steel from the xj-s and construct a steel tube frame that would be pre-fitted and then be glassed in during the body molding process, to specific pick-up points then welded to the xj-s inner body structure.
exactly
This would aid in body alignment as well. Hell...if anybody is going to cut up a xj-s beater might as well shorten the wheel base by 4 inches at the same time. Get out the sawsall...but I really would want to do it with a plasma cutter
The best way to do this is to stagger the joints across and along the cars axis where feasible. You could even oxy butt-weld the joints but easier to jig by leaving a 1/2 in extra, joggle the edge, drill 1/4 in holes, use self tapping screws to secure the two together and then plug MIG through the lap joint at 1 in intervals. On a restoration project or valuable car I'd take all the spot-welded seams apart and make the joint at the same place but this would be harder work. (I cut two accident damaged TR7s in half and welded them together again in a day).
I really need to look at the ratio and proportions from the front of the xj-s to the front door hinges and compare it with the DB5s...still lots to consider.
Good to know the Jaguar xk engine and transmission is lighter than the AM combo. Never seen a manual Jaguar gearbox here. Don't even know if they were available for the North American market for the xj-s or xj6 or any Jaguar except my x-type sport.
there's plenty about as manual - o/d on early XJ6, s type MKX etc
Think late 1960s
Had a hard enough time finding a 930 transaxle for my Porsche project. Discussion of available gear ratios and final drive ratios is a subject to discuss in great depth...but not now.
Suggest you find a scrap XJS and measure car width across door shut flanges at the sill (where the seals go), across sill outer upper edges and lower edge of sill to screen base. let me know when you have some figures and I'll check them against the real thing.
I'm all for people making cool stuff and most replica or kit car projects I've seen are truly amazing. I have every admiration for anyone who has the knowledge and passion to do something like this.
However, a couple of things are niggling me with the idea of making a replica DB5.
1) copyright. No one has said anything about copyright. Patents are one thing, trademarks are not designs as such, but copyright could be an issue. AM could get a bit snotty as you're effectively copying their design, especially when people start talking of taking moulds off real 5's. from what I'm told, copyright covers a design for 70 years, the clock starts ticking after the original designer dies, OR the item ceases production OR the company that produces the item ceases trading. Since AM are still trading, I would assume they could quite legally tell you to stop being silly. There is no getting round it, even without AM badges on, or not using a single AM part, your replica will still be a likeness, and therefore be treading on AM's very large and well heeled brothel creepers. It's a cute idea to approach AM with a begging letter asking for an agreement to be signed, but I think I know what the answer would be...
2) why, if you're going to the trouble of making your own car, would you want to make a DB5? Even after all the legal issues, the design problems, the sourcing of materials, drawing plans, consulting the right people and financing such a huge undertaking, you will still only have a fake aston. Every time someone asks, you will (unless you're a bit dishonest) havd to confess that no, it's not a real aston. Wouldn't it be better for someone to ask where your car came from and you be able to answer that you designed and built it? I'd take more pride from building a car of my own design instead of having to confess to copying AM.
We'd all like to be donning the overly tight and short cut TF suits, and tearing up the local roads in our silver birch 5's, but lets face it, if you do that, you need to do it for real.
It's great to dream, but I fear that after a load of hard work, anyone who builds their own fake 5 will simply be left with an incurable itch that only the genuine article can scratch.
I'm all for people making cool stuff and most replica or kit car projects I've seen are truly amazing. I have every admiration for anyone who has the knowledge and passion to do something like this.
However, a couple of things are niggling me with the idea of making a replica DB5.
1) copyright. No one has said anything about copyright. Patents are one thing, trademarks are not designs as such, but copyright could be an issue. AM could get a bit snotty as you're effectively copying their design, especially when people start talking of taking moulds off real 5's. from what I'm told, copyright covers a design for 70 years, the clock starts ticking after the original designer dies, OR the item ceases production OR the company that produces the item ceases trading. Since AM are still trading, I would assume they could quite legally tell you to stop being silly. There is no getting round it, even without AM badges on, or not using a single AM part, your replica will still be a likeness, and therefore be treading on AM's very large and well heeled brothel creepers. It's a cute idea to approach AM with a begging letter asking for an agreement to be signed, but I think I know what the answer would be...
2) why, if you're going to the trouble of making your own car, would you want to make a DB5? Even after all the legal issues, the design problems, the sourcing of materials, drawing plans, consulting the right people and financing such a huge undertaking, you will still only have a fake aston. Every time someone asks, you will (unless you're a bit dishonest) havd to confess that no, it's not a real aston. Wouldn't it be better for someone to ask where your car came from and you be able to answer that you designed and built it? I'd take more pride from building a car of my own design instead of having to confess to copying AM.
We'd all like to be donning the overly tight and short cut TF suits, and tearing up the local roads in our silver birch 5's, but lets face it, if you do that, you need to do it for real.
It's great to dream, but I fear that after a load of hard work, anyone who builds their own fake 5 will simply be left with an incurable itch that only the genuine article can scratch.
MG -{
Forget it jeff... You're wasting you're time...
It's plain to see where this escapade is heading....
At least we tried... 8-)
And of course you won't hear brothel creepers creeping up on you until you get the envelope in the post.
As someone already said, better be out on the court summons date..
Lol, each unto their own, but I'm thinking there must be a reason why a replica DB5 hadn't been made before.... maybe it's cos it's so ugly?
One major down side to this inevitably disappointing discussion is I've now got Susan Boyle singing in my head.... "I dreamed a dream in days gone byyyyy"
Lol, each unto their own, but I'm thinking there must be a reason why a replica DB5 hadn't been made before.... maybe it's cos it's so ugly?
One major down side to this inevitably disappointing discussion is I've now got Susan Boyle singing in my head.... "I dreamed a dream in days gone byyyyy"
A rather regrettable side effect.
Mmm... More regrettable is the Tgt that you'll give someone the idea of a fibreglass Susan Boyle...
Building a replica Mercedes in Germany might well be a problem because of those little Hitlers at Mercedes and their pathetic "dog-in-the-manger" attitude. (What a bunch of a**holes eh?)
Parts for Aston Martins and a wide variety of other cars are copied by other manufacturers for the aftermarket without any problem. Jaguar don't sue the makers of Aristocats, or Suffolk SS100s. Unlike Mercedes, they know that the tiny replica market would not detract from current sales - in fact it would more likely enhance it by free advertising of the marque and increase in sales of genuine parts. Even if they were able to, they would not want the bad publicity the Mercedes attitude engenders. But as long as you don't put an Aston badge on it and sell it, they can't do anything anyway in UK law. You can even buy a brand new DB5 chassis - which I can assure you is not made under licence.
The reason that there are no DB5 replicas commercially available is probably mainly due to the expense and/or difficulty of building one. The market for genuine cars is heavily investment-driven now and a DB5 kit-car is a very dubious, time-consuming and expensive investment. And if you have the money, it makes far more sense to spend 2000 hrs restoring a real one than building a look-alike. And nobody would be fooled that a Q plate meant the car had been prepared by Q.
"In a case where the collar clearly matches the (hand) cuffs, Aston Martin went after a small factory in china using 3D printing to recreat the famous Bond car , saying they used photos taken at the shanghai exhibition which only opened last week.
In only 4 days they were able to make 2 whole cars, and if allowed, would have turned out 40,000 cars before running out of aliminium ink."
As part of my work I have 3D scans of three x DB5 (and another that is exclusive rights of a particular client), DB6 Volante, DB4 GT, DB4 and DB5 Volante chassis. Can they be used for replica cars on a commercial basis? ...Personally I would not and the reason is very simple. If you check on the UK intellectual Property Office website you will find that Aston Martin heritage boils down to badges/logos, air vent on front wing and critically the shape of the radiator grill.
If you don't infringe on the three issues above happy days.....probably. However your DB5 will not look like a DB5 and therefore why bother.
I would say Aston Martin are not protecting their brand very well as I do not see much difference between slinging the keys of your Cygnet on a bar and doing the same with your Aston Martin replicar. Critically Aston sanction the Cygnet as is their right.
If it helps anyone feel better most Aston Martins up to the DB7 V12 are god awful to drive.
Welcome 3de.
The 3D's would be wery useful.and if there is a scan of the
Body you could do section cut's and use those as templates
For a plug build.like this
So I have some experience with IP and such in Texas, USofA. Probably not specifically useful, but my experience over a many year career tells me this: Anyone with a filing fee, a pencil, and a Big Chief tablet can and will sue you regardless of what you do or don;t do. You can't live your life worrying about law suits. Build a DB5 from scratch, from bits and pieces or don't do either. But don't let the possibility of litigation make the decision for you, because that is as unpredictable as the weather in the next 5 minutes.
) and when the AM lawyers come knocking, would you be more than happy to offer your services Mike?
Ah, if there's one thing the world needs.....
I've always been told that in this day and age of compensation and lawsuits, its always best to cover one's arse. Take good old 'Health and Safety' for instance, does anyone really believe it's there to make working conditions safer, or is it there to cover arses?
I'm sticking to my guns on this one, a totally faithful db5 replica is asking for trouble, is anyone brave/stupid enough to take the 'it won't happen to me' gamble? Asking permission will simply put you on the AM radar.
An original car with design cues taken from a host of nice motors however is much more appealing in my mind.
However, one firm that is a sign of encouragement is ASM. Many years back, a company called ARA started a replica Aston DBR1 project, for whatever reason (i'm not sure if it was legal or financial issues) the project and company folded. Andrew Soar bought all the kit from ARA and intended to make his own private DBR1 replica, but then demand came knocking....
Don't get too happy clappy though guys, there may be some reason why the ASM DBR Le Mans can continue production, such as the DBR2 which it takes it's cues from wasn't an AM production model, plus only 2 (or is it 3) DBR2's were ever made. I think there's something to do with production numbers of the original when it comes to which cars you can copy and which you can't. I may be utterly wrong, but it wouldn't surprise me if there's some kind of loophole out there.....
) and when the AM lawyers come knocking, would you be more than happy to offer your services Mike?
Ah, if there's one thing the world needs.....
I've always been told that in this day and age of compensation and lawsuits, its always best to cover one's arse. Take good old 'Health and Safety' for instance, does anyone really believe it's there to make working conditions safer, or is it there to cover arses?
I'm sticking to my guns on this one, a totally faithful db5 replica is asking for trouble, is anyone brave/stupid enough to take the 'it won't happen to me' gamble? Asking permission will simply put you on the AM radar.
An original car with design cues taken from a host of nice motors however is much more appealing in my mind.
However, one firm that is a sign of encouragement is ASM. Many years back, a company called ARA started a replica Aston DBR1 project, for whatever reason (i'm not sure if it was legal or financial issues) the project and company folded. Andrew Soar bought all the kit from ARA and intended to make his own private DBR1 replica, but then demand came knocking....
Don't get too happy clappy though guys, there may be some reason why the ASM DBR Le Mans can continue production, such as the DBR2 which it takes it's cues from wasn't an AM production model, plus only 2 (or is it 3) DBR2's were ever made. I think there's something to do with production numbers of the original when it comes to which cars you can copy and which you can't. I may be utterly wrong, but it wouldn't surprise me if there's some kind of loophole out there.....
Good hunting guys.
MG -{
I have utmost respect for the Andrew Soar approach. Could be biased as have conducted work for him, but in my view his cautious approach is a winner. Check out lack of Aston logos on his website. Also DBR does not have the Aston grill that as previously mentioned is protected.
In my view ignoring the possibility of a cease and desist is not wise and possibly very costly both in money and time terms.
Once again, DB5 commercial rep would cause a whole storm of aggro in my view.
@minigeff: Please stick to your guns! With you I agree this much, it is true there are individuals and organizations whose only reason to be is litigation. If A-M is such a built for litigation organization then do not build even one replica DB5. But in more general terms I stand by my position that choosing to do A over B only because A is less likely to bring litigation makes for a boring existence.
) and when the AM lawyers come knocking, would you be more than happy to offer your services Mike?
Ah, if there's one thing the world needs.....
I've always been told that in this day and age of compensation and lawsuits, its always best to cover one's arse. Take good old 'Health and Safety' for instance, does anyone really believe it's there to make working conditions safer, or is it there to cover arses?
I'm sticking to my guns on this one, a totally faithful db5 replica is asking for trouble, is anyone brave/stupid enough to take the 'it won't happen to me' gamble? Asking permission will simply put you on the AM radar.
An original car with design cues taken from a host of nice motors however is much more appealing in my mind.
However, one firm that is a sign of encouragement is ASM. Many years back, a company called ARA started a replica Aston DBR1 project, for whatever reason (i'm not sure if it was legal or financial issues) the project and company folded. Andrew Soar bought all the kit from ARA and intended to make his own private DBR1 replica, but then demand came knocking....
Don't get too happy clappy though guys, there may be some reason why the ASM DBR Le Mans can continue production, such as the DBR2 which it takes it's cues from wasn't an AM production model, plus only 2 (or is it 3) DBR2's were ever made. I think there's something to do with production numbers of the original when it comes to which cars you can copy and which you can't. I may be utterly wrong, but it wouldn't surprise me if there's some kind of loophole out there.....
Good hunting guys.
MG -{
Wow - it's true - parenthood matures one
I like the new grown up Minigeff - lets have more !!
Regarding litigation risks I remain as above;
1) it's a certainty in this case
2) it wasn't then and won't be this time, a case of AM wanting to be bolshy - the owners club will do the shoving and AM will be required to do the falling on (per ton bricks)
3) there are plenty of AMOCMs on here - dont imagine it'll remain off the radar.
4) boring but free beats busy but beaten
5) yes the dbr1 is nothing like the DB5 case. There is no precedent whatsoever there.
Then again I did say don't waste ur breath minijeff
How about this amv8 bodykit? Anyone know anything about it
Size accurate. Seems like a good start for a
Replica bond car. Design protected or not I don't
Care.
Martin
Comments
I see your point about the headlight rims...are they a matched pair, as mirror images, or identical to each other. They do seem complex to make... are the originals polished aluminum ? or chromed steel ? Front and rear bumpers...ebay...in stainless...they do look good, a little pricey. They would be very difficult to make. Used bits and pieces of DB5s are simply not available in North America...some very nice reproduction pieces on Ebay from the States $.
It must have been a nightmare removing the aluminum body panels from the car. Interested in the process that you used.
In North America there are many xj6 from the mid 70s and up to choose from, and lots of rough, to very rough xj-s with V12s that people have just given up on. Mostly convertibles, alway automatics
My present thinking is...I really like the IRS jag rear and the inline 6 platform of the xj-s and I am beginning to see advantages to using mostly Jaguar mechanicals with this project as you suggest. IRS for the rear suspension, not original but better...and the xk inline 6 is really not that different to Marek's inline 6 except for the alloy vs cast iron weight difference. However, the front and rear track of the xj-s is quite a bit wider than the DB5s..I don't know if this is due to the rim width, offset, etc. But if the hub ends are within an inch or so, I think the rims could be spec to deal with that issue. Dayton seems to be able to make anything you want...for a price.
The xj-s wheel base is 102 inches...DB5 is 98. At the present I am not sure how to deal with the 4 inch difference. I have not examined a xj-s from below, but I am pretty sure it is not a body on frame construction...unibody...perhaps with some frame connectors ? I dislike shortening the structure of a unibody car...seems to be too much work for too little payoff.
I have never worked with polycarbonate before, seems like a little bit of practice is necessary to get it right. Looking forward to discussing your project further.
A pleasure to meet you on this forum Greyhound.
Likewise DB5Guy
Very interested in photos of your project. I have seen photos of the massive DB5 chassis in plate steel. You are dead on...not really difficult to copy the chassis...with an original to take measures from, or blueprints...as the sections seem to be mostly flat, or without compound curves. I believe the chassis were build at the David Brown tractor factory...and it shows...really overbuilt for its intended purpose.
not so - see below
If a somewhat accurate replica were to be constructed, I would tend to try to lighten up the chassis where possible, thinner steel or even...aluminum ?
The DB5 is actually a really poor chassis design. The platform chassis has to be very heavily built to resist torsion and in spite of the ally body and superleggera support, the car is still very heavy.
A steel monocoque would be lighter and much more rigid. You couldn't save much weight on the chassis and retain torsional rigidity using the original design.
I see your point about the headlight rims...are they a matched pair, as mirror images, or identical to each other.
Identical
They do seem complex to make... are the originals polished aluminum ? or chromed steel ?
Early ally. late chromed brass
Front and rear bumpers...ebay...in stainless...they do look good, a little pricey. They would be very difficult to make. Used bits and pieces of DB5s are simply not available in North America...some very nice reproduction pieces on Ebay from the States $.
It must have been a nightmare removing the aluminum body panels from the car. Interested in the process that you used.
Cut the rear roof pillars through the fuel filler recesses and the outer sills at the rear wheelarch. The rear body can then be unscrewed. Forward half is cut at screen pillar bases and flanges
rolled back on A posts and round bonnet aperture.
In North America there are many xj6 from the mid 70s and up to choose from, and lots of rough, to very rough xj-s with V12s that people have just given up on. Mostly convertibles, alway automatics
My present thinking is...I really like the IRS jag rear and the inline 6 platform of the xj-s and I am beginning to see advantages to using mostly Jaguar mechanicals with this project as you suggest. IRS for the rear suspension, not original but better...and the xk inline 6 is really not that different to Marek's inline 6 except for the alloy vs cast iron weight difference.
Because the ZF box is so heavy a Jag engine/box is probably lighter than the Aston engine/ZF
However, the front and rear track of the xj-s is quite a bit wider than the DB5s..I don't know if this is due to the rim width, offset, etc. But if the hub ends are within an inch or so, I think the rims could be spec to deal with that issue. Dayton seems to be able to make anything you want...for a price.
The xj-s wheel base is 102 inches...DB5 is 98. At the present I am not sure how to deal with the 4 inch difference. I have not examined a xj-s from below, but I am pretty sure it is not a body on frame construction...unibody...perhaps with some frame connectors ?
Its monocoque but you'd really want the convertible for rigidity as you'd be using the fibreglass roof with only lightweight tube support.
I dislike shortening the structure of a unibody car...seems to be too much work for too little payoff.
Its not difficult - I've done it - but not on an XJS
I have never worked with polycarbonate before, seems like a little bit of practice is necessary to get it right. Looking forward to discussing your project further.
You have to heat the plastic to mould it and the polycarbonate is more tolerant of high temps. Really it should be vacuum formed but i tried it using a fibreglass buck and mould either side. You use cloth to prevent marking the plastic. Its not easy. However you can get it done professionally at considerable cost saving on the AM price.
Altering the track on an independent susp Jag is straightforward
using internal sleeves on the wishbones and external on the halfshafts. Using that setup would be easier than altering the track on a Mk2 axle and building the watts linkage and trailing arms for the live axle as per original Aston. Handling would be better of course. The Aston suffers from poor damping, roll and pitching and the Jag suspension would certainly be better in that respect.
Greyhound
I like the direction we are going here, and I thank you for your insight and sharing your knowledge.
I simply do not have the experience with olders Jaguars to know that you can narrow the track on IRS without messing up the suspension geometry, so I will go with your experience. The Wikipedia entry on the Jaguar IRS shows a few versions with different track widths for different applications...that is good to know. Can the front also be narrowed as well ?
I think I will order a Haynes manual on the xj-s (any good reference material that you would suggest?) to get to know the car better.
Your statement on the chassis design is interesting...what I meant by overbuilt was that the weight of that chassis was overkill...(I guess in a vain attempt build some sort of torsional rigidity) I wonder if AM actually tested these aspects of their cars then ? Perhaps...if the windshield didn't crack over deep potholes it was ok...lightly sprung car with lots of roll and pitch. As you say.
Without a doubt the convertible unibody/monocoque is the way to go. Lighter, much more rigid. When Jaguar designed the convertible xj-s I am certain that they reinforced the lower body structure. Maybe not as tight as the coupe but definitely the best choice for our purpose, and frankly much more available than the coupe over here in the Great White North.
My approach would be to remove the mininum of structural steel from the xj-s and construct a steel tube frame that would be pre-fitted and then be glassed in during the body molding process, to specific pick-up points then welded to the xj-s inner body structure. This would aid in body alignment as well. Hell...if anybody is going to cut up a xj-s beater might as well shorten the wheel base by 4 inches at the same time. Get out the sawsall...but I really would want to do it with a plasma cutter
Good to know the Jaguar xk engine and transmission is lighter than the AM combo. Never seen a manual Jaguar gearbox here. Don't even know if they were available for the North American market for the xj-s or xj6 or any Jaguar except my x-type sport. Had a hard enough time finding a 930 transaxle for my Porsche project. Discussion of available gear ratios and final drive ratios is a subject to discuss in great depth...but not now.
Have a good Easter.
I simply do not have the experience with olders Jaguars to know that you can narrow the track on IRS without messing up the suspension geometry, so I will go with your experience.
The half shafts have shims to alter the camber so you don't need to be hyper-accurate in cutting and welding.
The Wikipedia entry on the Jaguar IRS shows a few versions with different track widths for different applications...that is good to know. Can the front also be narrowed as well ?
A lot more difficult because if you narrow the subframe, you'd have to move the pick-up points.
I think I will order a Haynes manual on the xj-s (any good reference material that you would suggest?) to get to know the car better.
I think Haynes is OK cos its basically ripped off the factory manual anyway. I have the parts book I think, but certainly workshop manual for similar XJ 12 ( most mechanicals very similar) Also have all factory workshop manuals and parts books for pre 1975 jags
Your statement on the chassis design is interesting...what I meant by overbuilt was that the weight of that chassis was overkill...(I guess in a vain attempt build some sort of torsional rigidity)
(yes the latter was the plan - but it didn't work!)
I wonder if AM actually tested these aspects of their cars then ? Perhaps...if the windshield didn't crack over deep potholes it was ok...lightly sprung car with lots of roll and pitch. As you say.
Its the superleggera roof (not the ally) that cracks with the flexing. Its Reynolds 531 or similar so you can only braze it to repair.
Without a doubt the convertible unibody/monocoque is the way to go. Lighter, much more rigid. When Jaguar designed the convertible xj-s I am certain that they reinforced the lower body structure.
correct
Maybe not as light as the coupe but definitely the best choice for our purpose, and frankly much more available than the coupe over here in the Great White North.
My approach would be to remove the mininum of structural steel from the xj-s and construct a steel tube frame that would be pre-fitted and then be glassed in during the body molding process, to specific pick-up points then welded to the xj-s inner body structure.
exactly
This would aid in body alignment as well. Hell...if anybody is going to cut up a xj-s beater might as well shorten the wheel base by 4 inches at the same time. Get out the sawsall...but I really would want to do it with a plasma cutter
The best way to do this is to stagger the joints across and along the cars axis where feasible. You could even oxy butt-weld the joints but easier to jig by leaving a 1/2 in extra, joggle the edge, drill 1/4 in holes, use self tapping screws to secure the two together and then plug MIG through the lap joint at 1 in intervals. On a restoration project or valuable car I'd take all the spot-welded seams apart and make the joint at the same place but this would be harder work. (I cut two accident damaged TR7s in half and welded them together again in a day).
I really need to look at the ratio and proportions from the front of the xj-s to the front door hinges and compare it with the DB5s...still lots to consider.
Good to know the Jaguar xk engine and transmission is lighter than the AM combo. Never seen a manual Jaguar gearbox here. Don't even know if they were available for the North American market for the xj-s or xj6 or any Jaguar except my x-type sport.
there's plenty about as manual - o/d on early XJ6, s type MKX etc
Think late 1960s
Had a hard enough time finding a 930 transaxle for my Porsche project. Discussion of available gear ratios and final drive ratios is a subject to discuss in great depth...but not now.
Suggest you find a scrap XJS and measure car width across door shut flanges at the sill (where the seals go), across sill outer upper edges and lower edge of sill to screen base. let me know when you have some figures and I'll check them against the real thing.
regards G.
I'm all for people making cool stuff and most replica or kit car projects I've seen are truly amazing. I have every admiration for anyone who has the knowledge and passion to do something like this.
However, a couple of things are niggling me with the idea of making a replica DB5.
1) copyright. No one has said anything about copyright. Patents are one thing, trademarks are not designs as such, but copyright could be an issue. AM could get a bit snotty as you're effectively copying their design, especially when people start talking of taking moulds off real 5's. from what I'm told, copyright covers a design for 70 years, the clock starts ticking after the original designer dies, OR the item ceases production OR the company that produces the item ceases trading. Since AM are still trading, I would assume they could quite legally tell you to stop being silly. There is no getting round it, even without AM badges on, or not using a single AM part, your replica will still be a likeness, and therefore be treading on AM's very large and well heeled brothel creepers. It's a cute idea to approach AM with a begging letter asking for an agreement to be signed, but I think I know what the answer would be...
2) why, if you're going to the trouble of making your own car, would you want to make a DB5? Even after all the legal issues, the design problems, the sourcing of materials, drawing plans, consulting the right people and financing such a huge undertaking, you will still only have a fake aston. Every time someone asks, you will (unless you're a bit dishonest) havd to confess that no, it's not a real aston. Wouldn't it be better for someone to ask where your car came from and you be able to answer that you designed and built it? I'd take more pride from building a car of my own design instead of having to confess to copying AM.
We'd all like to be donning the overly tight and short cut TF suits, and tearing up the local roads in our silver birch 5's, but lets face it, if you do that, you need to do it for real.
It's great to dream, but I fear that after a load of hard work, anyone who builds their own fake 5 will simply be left with an incurable itch that only the genuine article can scratch.
MG -{
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
Forget it jeff... You're wasting you're time...
It's plain to see where this escapade is heading....
At least we tried... 8-)
And of course you won't hear brothel creepers creeping up on you until you get the envelope in the post.
As someone already said, better be out on the court summons date..
One major down side to this inevitably disappointing discussion is I've now got Susan Boyle singing in my head.... "I dreamed a dream in days gone byyyyy"
A rather regrettable side effect.
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
Mmm... More regrettable is the Tgt that you'll give someone the idea of a fibreglass Susan Boyle...
At least no one would "Sue"....
Parts for Aston Martins and a wide variety of other cars are copied by other manufacturers for the aftermarket without any problem. Jaguar don't sue the makers of Aristocats, or Suffolk SS100s. Unlike Mercedes, they know that the tiny replica market would not detract from current sales - in fact it would more likely enhance it by free advertising of the marque and increase in sales of genuine parts. Even if they were able to, they would not want the bad publicity the Mercedes attitude engenders. But as long as you don't put an Aston badge on it and sell it, they can't do anything anyway in UK law. You can even buy a brand new DB5 chassis - which I can assure you is not made under licence.
The reason that there are no DB5 replicas commercially available is probably mainly due to the expense and/or difficulty of building one. The market for genuine cars is heavily investment-driven now and a DB5 kit-car is a very dubious, time-consuming and expensive investment. And if you have the money, it makes far more sense to spend 2000 hrs restoring a real one than building a look-alike. And nobody would be fooled that a Q plate meant the car had been prepared by Q.
greyhound
http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20130401/Bondcarmakers-in-shock-suit-sues-fakesters
"In a case where the collar clearly matches the (hand) cuffs, Aston Martin went after a small factory in china using 3D printing to recreat the famous Bond car , saying they used photos taken at the shanghai exhibition which only opened last week.
In only 4 days they were able to make 2 whole cars, and if allowed, would have turned out 40,000 cars before running out of aliminium ink."
Strange that there are four spelling errors in the quote that you took from the article. Those reporters...poor proofreading skills.
Maby....
Probably written by some joker who'd just woken up at 4.30am and couldn't be bothered to hit spell check button 8-)
http://3dengineers.co.uk/aston-martin-db5-iconic-classic-car-chassis-3d-scanned/
If you don't infringe on the three issues above happy days.....probably. However your DB5 will not look like a DB5 and therefore why bother.
I would say Aston Martin are not protecting their brand very well as I do not see much difference between slinging the keys of your Cygnet on a bar and doing the same with your Aston Martin replicar. Critically Aston sanction the Cygnet as is their right.
If it helps anyone feel better most Aston Martins up to the DB7 V12 are god awful to drive.
The 3D's would be wery useful.and if there is a scan of the
Body you could do section cut's and use those as templates
For a plug build.like this
One of this
I'd actually admire you for that, that's not a bad looking design. Bit 'pimp my ride' wheels but the shell is quite pretty IMO.
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
http://cars.uk.msn.com/news/it-wouldnt-have-happened-to-james-bond-aston-martin-db5-caught-in-floods#image=2
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
Cruel jeff....
Greyhound. Were is those pictures? We neeeeed pictures
Mechanic porn pictures
So I have some experience with IP and such in Texas, USofA. Probably not specifically useful, but my experience over a many year career tells me this: Anyone with a filing fee, a pencil, and a Big Chief tablet can and will sue you regardless of what you do or don;t do. You can't live your life worrying about law suits. Build a DB5 from scratch, from bits and pieces or don't do either. But don't let the possibility of litigation make the decision for you, because that is as unpredictable as the weather in the next 5 minutes.
Regards,
Mike
Ah, if there's one thing the world needs.....
I've always been told that in this day and age of compensation and lawsuits, its always best to cover one's arse. Take good old 'Health and Safety' for instance, does anyone really believe it's there to make working conditions safer, or is it there to cover arses?
I'm sticking to my guns on this one, a totally faithful db5 replica is asking for trouble, is anyone brave/stupid enough to take the 'it won't happen to me' gamble? Asking permission will simply put you on the AM radar.
An original car with design cues taken from a host of nice motors however is much more appealing in my mind.
However, one firm that is a sign of encouragement is ASM. Many years back, a company called ARA started a replica Aston DBR1 project, for whatever reason (i'm not sure if it was legal or financial issues) the project and company folded. Andrew Soar bought all the kit from ARA and intended to make his own private DBR1 replica, but then demand came knocking....
http://www.asmotorsport.co.uk/intro.html
Don't get too happy clappy though guys, there may be some reason why the ASM DBR Le Mans can continue production, such as the DBR2 which it takes it's cues from wasn't an AM production model, plus only 2 (or is it 3) DBR2's were ever made. I think there's something to do with production numbers of the original when it comes to which cars you can copy and which you can't. I may be utterly wrong, but it wouldn't surprise me if there's some kind of loophole out there.....
Good hunting guys.
MG -{
Vive le droit à la libre expression! Je suis Charlie!
www.helpforheroes.org.uk
www.cancerresearchuk.org
I have utmost respect for the Andrew Soar approach. Could be biased as have conducted work for him, but in my view his cautious approach is a winner. Check out lack of Aston logos on his website. Also DBR does not have the Aston grill that as previously mentioned is protected.
In my view ignoring the possibility of a cease and desist is not wise and possibly very costly both in money and time terms.
Once again, DB5 commercial rep would cause a whole storm of aggro in my view.
Cheers,
Mike
Wow - it's true - parenthood matures one
I like the new grown up Minigeff - lets have more !!
Regarding litigation risks I remain as above;
1) it's a certainty in this case
2) it wasn't then and won't be this time, a case of AM wanting to be bolshy - the owners club will do the shoving and AM will be required to do the falling on (per ton bricks)
3) there are plenty of AMOCMs on here - dont imagine it'll remain off the radar.
4) boring but free beats busy but beaten
5) yes the dbr1 is nothing like the DB5 case. There is no precedent whatsoever there.
Then again I did say don't waste ur breath minijeff
So I stand by that too.
Finally - yep more car porn always appreciated
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
A piece of interior of the db5. And easy to find part
Yh, Bondboys wants more Timmy Dalton or was it Deaton, can't remember
TIS - "The moment you think you got it figured - you're wrong"
Formerly known as Teppo
How about this amv8 bodykit? Anyone know anything about it
Size accurate. Seems like a good start for a
Replica bond car. Design protected or not I don't
Care.
Martin