Tsikot.ph PHUV Prototype

[jedi]

Hein, again, this is not the feedback thread for MVPMAP's PhUV... this thread is for Tsikot PHUV prototype...

http://tsikot.yehey.com/forums/showthread.php?p=83274

You're free to give your feedbacks, pero please, nakikiusap ako post it on the proper thread

edited: several posts were soft-deleted for the reason that they are out of topic. thank you for understanding. - Doc Tsikot

[orly_andico]

OGPro is right. We can make world-class industrial goods.

But the PhUV prototype is not a world-class industrial good. It looks like something slapped together and coated with paint. Something that looks ugly and is overpriced, to boot.

We can't do body panels? let's make everything FLAT as in FLAT. The Land Rover is ugly. But I prefer it to this thing. And the Land Rover is probably easier to construct. The Smart Car has flat sides. Let's do that.

If we stick to the "army of lateros" approach the Tsikot PHUV will end up exactly like the misbegotten monstrosity we've all seen.

I like this vehicle. It's the Pinzgauer. Look! all flat panels! and it looks better than the PhUV prototype!



Scale down the design a bit to a 7-seater and voila. I'd buy that PhUV.

[orly_andico]

Volvo C303.

My point is.. if you want a utilitarian vehicle that's easy to construct, don't pretend to make it look curvy and nice. We can't produce that. Make it so in-your-face ugly that its looks grow on you.

[orly_andico]

This approach would work too.. the Mowag Eagle.



Still vaguely Jeep-like, without the quarter-cylinder hood sides of the jeepney (in chrome no less!)

And, the all-important flat panels. Better, don't paint it glossy. Paint it matte, that way imperfections in the shaping of the metal don't reflect the light and become obvious.

[ogpro]

Volvo C303.

My point is.. if you want a utilitarian vehicle that's easy to construct, don't pretend to make it look curvy and nice. We can't produce that. Make it so in-your-face ugly that its looks grow on you.

Hehe, yeah! Remember the Harabas! Hehe.

If I may ask the proponents of this thread. Have you guys done any market studies, like what people would really want in a locally produced vehicle? Or are you all just going by what YOU THINK they want?
Because sometimes there is a huge gap in that assumption, by finding out what people would want, you may realize that you don't have to focus so much on some things that you are putting too many resources on.

Personally (without speaking for the general population), I'd think it would be this:

1. Fuel efficient. (all this talk of body panels and very little on power supply). Of course, this would include some form or aerodynamics, road worthiness, etc., that play a part in fuel efficiency.
2. Dependable, something easy to maintain, and even more importantly, easy to fix.
3. CHEAP! This should be no. 1, but sige, lets assume it costs a little money for something fuel efficient and dependable.


Notice I didn't include looks? Looks are relative, we already know we can't compete with the toyotas and mitsu's and isuzus on looks, so WHY EVEN TRY? Once you get past that, you're already a step ahead. When you deliver something reliable, cheap, and fuel efficient, people will over look looks, since the word UTILITY is in the name of this project, make that your priority. Now all the talk of sheetmetal, flat, shaped, or otherwise, becomes secondary.

To OYIL, dude, I love your sketches and how they help me visualize this project, but once again, those designs would involve production systems that would make costs prohibitive. Might I request some sketches that look a bit more realistic? Those giant 22 inch wheels look great on hummers, but they cost about 20grand EACH.

[orly_andico]

Personally (without speaking for the general population), I'd think it would be this:

1. Fuel efficient. (all this talk of body panels and very little on power supply). Of course, this would include some form or aerodynamics, road worthiness, etc., that play a part in fuel efficiency.
2. Dependable, something easy to maintain, and even more importantly, easy to fix.
3. CHEAP! This should be no. 1, but sige, lets assume it costs a little money for something fuel efficient and dependable.


Notice I didn't include looks? Looks are relative, we already know we can't compete with the toyotas and mitsu's and isuzus on looks, so WHY EVEN TRY? Once you get past that, you're already a step ahead. When you deliver something reliable, cheap, and fuel efficient, people will over look looks, since the word UTILITY is in the name of this project, make that your priority. Now all the talk of sheetmetal, flat, shaped, or otherwise, becomes secondary.

You are absolutely right. And as someone who has actually manufactured something that we can be proud of (unlike the misbegotten MVPMAP PHUV) your opinions carry far more weight.

Personally I really like the Mowag Eagle. Make the rear longer so it can carry a sheet of plywood (even if not flat), and removable rear seats, you have a winner.

It's just like a jeepney. Except without the jeepney's excessive use of chrome and prancing horses. I would actually buy one if it were available at the PHUV's price and with a new engine like the claimed PHUV.

Check out the PHUV's paint job! that probably cost 30K right there, for the paint and labor. And without perfect body panel fit, the paint job is wasted. I say go matte!

[BRROOOMMMM]

good morning sa mga master..........pwedi pa ba ako sumali baka may maishare ako kahit bolt, nut, washer and lock washer baka nalimutan nyo yon.............good luck sa new design. regards

[drey]

good morning sa mga master..........pwedi pa ba ako sumali baka may maishare ako kahit bolt, nut, washer and lock washer baka nalimutan nyo yon.............good luck sa new design. regards

Hello sir Broooommm,

Happy to have you on board! You can freely share in here.

-drey

[alexternative]

Ay........bakit ganyan?

if they want this vehicle to sell good they should design it more presentable even a local AUV built or a owner type jeep looks better..

[jpdm]

For the Critics of PHUV,

hold your horses, guys....especially those who criticize in high heavens the PHUV and perhaps the up and coming Tsikot PHUV.

Please, recall the rationale behind the PHUV project.

Also, Do not worry, first, it is just a prototype, the imperfections can be remedied; second, this country is a democracy, you can be sure the government will not compel/threaten you to buy the PHUV, if fact the government DOESNT EVEN CARE;thirdly, those critics of PHUV in this thread, I've notice dont have Filipino rides (BMW, Focus),thus the PHUV is definitely way too low and inferior for their taste;fourth, the PHUV will not serve the A-B market but the transport and C-D market, puede rin ang OFWs kung magnenegosyo at taga-province;fifth, it is just a start, for GOd's Sake!, an alternative for those guerilla auto/AUV assembly shops using much inferior technology;sixth, it will replace the aging fleet of jeepneys (that is why the MVPMAP signed a MOU with a big transport federation in the country)in the metropolis;seventh, I think its ok for the PHUV to become the tranport workhorse in the countryside;lastly, hindi para pa-cute vehicle ito at sa mga sosyal, di puedeng pansundo sa syota o iparada sa harap ng mga gimikan sa the Fort.It is not also meant to be displayed in the auto shows in Manila or Tokyo or Paris--siguro pag may refinement ok.

The PHUV project (MVPMAP o Tsikot) is meant to empower us to built our local auto industry. Again, if the PHUV (MVPMAP, Tsikot, Chok)will gain a following from transport groups i.e jeepney federations, transport coop etc.again, I'M PRAYING THAT WHATEVER PROFITS WILL BE EARNED SHOULD BY REINVESTED TO IMPROVE MORE THE VEHICLE. TECHNOLOGY CAN EASILY BE ACQUIRED---PERA LANG ANG KATAPAT!

SUGGESTION, BILHIN YUNG MGA SINARANG FACTORY NG GM O FORD SA AUCTION--- LOCK, STOCK AND BARREL KATULAD NG GINAWA NG TATA MOTORS BInILI BUS MAKING MACHINERY (GROUP) NG DAEWOO.

HAY, puede ba maging constructive yung iba!lumalabas pagka-elitista ninyo!!!!!!!!!!!!!