Slashdot Mirror
More on the Tango Electric Car
jj00 writes "Here is an interesting story about a father-son built car in Spokane, Washington. What is most surprising is its top speed (130 MPH) and its weight (about the same as a Camry), and it runs on batteries!"
"Golf cart on steroids!"
Hrm, how about Shiny, Fast, Red Coffin.
I'm all for electric cars, and I understand that the creators wanted something to cut through traffic, but I don't think I'd really want to move one of these things through traffic next to insane soccer moms in their H2s.
Looking at the car, one can't help but wonder about its safety.
"It has jet-pilot seat belts and a racing-regulation roll cage; it weighs more than 3,000 pounds, about the same as a Toyota Camry, including 1,100 pounds of Yellow Top batteries under the floorboards as ballast, so it's not tippy on turns."
If they put air bags in the thing, it'd compress you quite well. They need pictures of the inside of the car as well. I would not like to see this car in an accident. Even the "bumper" if you would call it that, is virtually non-existant.
So you have enough room for a passenger in the back? A comfortable passenger or tightly squeezed passenger?
"A narrow car could or even travel between lanes, like a motorcycle." could it? sure. could it legally? uhh
I love it. It's small, efficient, fast, and has plenty range to get me around town. I'm first in line to get the 20 grand "peoples model."
I rather doubt I'd do 130 in it, though. But having 1100 pounds of batteries under the floorboards it great for stability. But in terms of crash safety, something this small and dense (Just shy of a ton with NO batteries) looks like it would get crushed by it's own intertia in a crash with a structure.
At any rate, it doesn't mesh very well with oil companies or automakers, and they will probably pay out the ass to make it fail. GE offered to do a small test run, then rescinded and sued California over the 10% ZEV requirement. I mean, for almost all practical purposes around town this could replace our Camry. Except for long-distance trips or visits to the hardware store, it will do just as well. But it doesn't feed oil companies nearly as much money, and automakers make a bigger profit selling Stupid Useless Vehicles (to most who buy them).
I would have to agree that, for most people, it is indeed un-American to drive an SUV. Most of you don't need the damn thing, and by getting 8 MPG you just give middle-eastern oil theocracies more economic weapons to hold at our throats.
I recall this was worked out in an issue of Discover...
Using fossil fuels in your car directly is at most 26 or so % efficient. Fossil fuels at a plant are turned into electric at ~40% efficiency, to battery charge at ~90%, and to motion at ~85%, totalling around 30% efficiency. So even with the losses in all the intervening steps, you will at worst break even and more likely still keep some pollutants out of the air. Of course, if it comes from a renewable source then it's already pollution-free. If it comes from Nu-Ku-Ler, then you're responsible for a few grams of radioactive waste out of around 2 cubic meters per year.
There is also the fact that most fossil fuel plants are built where people are not there to inhale the fumes, while cars discharge their fumes exactly where people are: on the road.
You know, with talk of electric cars, I wonder what's going to happen in a medium-speed crash with lots of batteries in a car. Sulfuric acid everywhere?
what about hydroelectic cars? No batteries to replace. Unlimited range. All you need is lots and lots of fresh, clean water!
No, seriously, this car is cool and everything but I'm far more excited by fuel cell vehicles. There are already production models with a > 200 mile range. Now if the government would just give us one of the tiny hydrogen convertors on those UFO's they have stashed away...