Slashdot Mirror
Appropriate Tech, 300mpg Car Top 2008 Innovators
longacre writes "While some giggles were floating around about the irony of a Microsoft product (Photosynth) finding itself on the same top 10 products list as a toilet, the true stars of last night's annual Popular Mechanics Breakthrough Awards were innovations of far more consequence. MIT professor Amy B. Smith won the marquis Leadership Award for her work on building simple, low-cost technology to help developing countries. Joining Smith from the appropriate technology field were a group of CalTech students who created all-terrain wheelchairs for the disabled, and a Procter & Gamble exec who developed a water purifying powder for the third world. Aptera Vehicles founders Steve Ambro and Chris Anthony made the cut for their 300mpg Typ-1e, which is expected to hit showrooms by the end of this year. Other winners ranged from the Mars Phoenix Lander team, to the developers of a low-cost cancer test, to the creators of Spore."
300mpg is impressive, but they stopped selling trike's for a reason ( and they now sell quad's in their place ).
That trend with electric vehicles actually worries me, and I can't help but wonder at the safety implications.
Is it really so difficult to keep the drag co-efficient down without losing the extra wheel?
GrpA
Enjoy science fiction? "Turing Evolved" - AI, Mecha, Androids and rail-gun battles. What more could you want?
Single front-wheel trikes are dangerous. Single back-wheel trikes are pratically as stable as a four-wheeler.
As a bonus, this one looks amazing (saw one in person this summer): http://spyder.brp.com/
If you bother to read the blurb for the Aptera, you'll see the 300mpg claim is for a fully charged hybrid.
Unfortunately there was no information on how many gallons of electricity it holds.
Pit this versus a full size truck or even a semi and it has little chance.
And what small economy car do you want to drive head-on into a semi? Frankly, unless it is another semi, you are going to have a very bad day... And even if it is another semi, the day won't be good.
Why does everyone cry "Safety" whenever a small car is introduced. Think of it as a motorcycle with a roof and it becomes much easier to envision driving to work every day. I doubt if I'm the only one tired of the safety cops trying to controll everything I do. Dangerous is FUN.
I'd still question the stability. It depends on the location of the CoP, which can vary depending on the situation the vehicle finds itself in.
Front-wheel trikes are succeptible to issues when braking (CoP moves forward) and turning (CoP moves to the side) at the same time.
Under those circumstances, which are reasonably likely to occur, I agree with you on the configuration.
However, under other circumstances involving stability and under high yaw (eg, braking causes the car to spin, etc, and with less traction on one rear tire than two) I'd still be fearful that the car would flip rather than slide - all that really needs to happen, IMO, is for the back-end to spin around to the front under braking.
Plus you also have the issues related to contact surface area of the rear tire.
I guess I'm talking about the kinds of positions you might find yourself in, that you learn to deal with in an advanced driving course, but whenever you go for three wheels, the first compromise is stability.
The car does look nice though... Like a composite body aircraft cockpit - :)
GrpA
Enjoy science fiction? "Turing Evolved" - AI, Mecha, Androids and rail-gun battles. What more could you want?
Quite true, so long as the CoM is positioned just behind the front wheels. When braking, that puts the CG directly between the front wheels. You're left with the same resistance to rollover, but you have a lower moment of inertia, so it's more responsive. Also, with two wheels at front steering, just like in a normal car, you have similar tendancy toward understeer rather than the extreme oversteer of "delta" trikes.
There was a good article from Road and Track in May 1982 where they tested various configurations; there's excerpts here.
Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?
Go down. Less demand with the same supply means lower prices. Of course OPEC might try to reduce supply, but it wouldn't go up overall.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
Not to mention that its roof and door crush strengths are over double the NTSB standard. Composite monocoque structures are nice that way.
The crash test results should put a lot of concerns at rest. Yes, they've been simulating crash tests with the same software that BMW uses, but nothing comforts like real-world tests. They just took the jobs for crash test engineers off their jobs page, so looks like they've been filled.
Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?
I'd like to see what happens to the drag coefficient(and the dent in the wallet of the owner) if that thing gets a ding
My mother in law laughed off the suggestion of damage to the Aptera when it came up in a conversation. She used to work at a place that built fiberglass hovercraft and said that they're pretty easy to repair. This is a 6th generation quilter in her sixties. Besides, composites are a lot more resistant to damage than steel. As for taking out a wheel, do you really think a thin metal skin on your car around your wheels is offering any relevant protection?
In other words, nerds, think about this: If you were at a party
Your insight into the mind of women is stunning. Really.
Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?
by that logic we should all drive tanks so that when we get in accidents our cars survive but we die (crumple zones are designed so that the car absorb the energy from a collision rather than passengers). your attitude is more suited to destruction derby than road safety.
ICE engines are a technological anachronism no matter how you slice it--both environmentally and in terms of energy efficiency. so what you feel is based on irrational beliefs. the only reason hybrids are useful now is because we haven't yet built the infrastructure for plug-in electric vehicles to completely replace ICE vehicles. it's an intermediate phase. it would not make sense to have hybrids if electric propulsion did not have advantages over ICE propulsion.
but all forms of progress, whether technological, cultural, social, or political, there will be a strong rearguard reaction to overcome. therefore it's important to disseminate information and encourage people to take a rational approach to the issue rather than falling victim to knee-jerk responses based on ignorant reactionary attitudes. luckily there are companies out there working to dispel false negative perceptions of electric vehicles as a lot of people still associate environmentally-friendly with poor performance.
Well I won't comment (I don't build cars and I am not a physicist) but here's an old clip of one of their first prototypes being driven around the parking lot.
The picture of the #1 item on the list - the toilet looks like[1] one I had in my apartment in Tokyo almost 10 years ago. WTF? Is this a joke, or have people really gotten that insular and stupid in the US?
[1] It does not have the control panel to flush water up your ass after pooping nor heat the toilet seat like Japanese toilets did back then the "innovative" water thingy looks identical.
It's muchmuchmuch easier to avoid a crash in the first place in a small, maneuverable vehicle than in a big one with a lot of mass. Semi dodges a kid in the road, swerves into another lane with oncoming traffic. Now try to get that huge mass to swerve back into the proper lane. Try the same dodge in a motorcycle, small car or something similar.
The hybrid has 40-60 miles of electric range and a 5 gallon gas tank. The vehicle gets 130mpg in charge-sustaining mode in both 55mph steady-state and in city driving (lower at high freeway speeds). So, I'm sure you can do the math. Base price for the Typ-1e (electric) is $27k, while the base price for the Typ-1h (plug-in hybrid) is $30k. These are, of course, subject to change, but they seem to have roughly stabilized on these values. Like with any new car purchase, expect to add cost for options, taxes, title, and registration.
38K miles a year? Wow. Yeah, that'd sure be a big cut in your fuel bill ;)
Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?
You might have to make a safety compromise and learn to drive it properly. Even so, my fiance's 50cc Honda Metropolitan gets around 100mpg with a top speed of 40mph. My dual sport 250cc Kawasaki Super Sherpa gets around 70mpg at 40mph with the stock tires on pavement and has a top speed near 70mph. Not having to worry about being visible to other drivers and the fatigue caused by poor weather would be a huge improvement also. Unfortunately I don't see this requiring a motorcycle endorsement or similar in order to drive, like Cushmans or other similar vehicles, and the cost will be far more prohibitive than that of a 250cc motorcycle or scooter. You might want to wear a helmet while driving it though. I'd recommend one of the motorcycle helmets with the flip down visors like fighter pilots have!
A friend of mine has one, I've ridden it. It's a fantastic machine. I think he said he paid $19k for it. He sold his '86 BMW with a side car to get it. Really, Really amazing bike (do we still call it a 'bike'?)!
put the what in the where?
The GP is absolutely correct, though. Americans have this mentality of assuming that crashes are inevitable that's not shared in much of the rest of the world. Hence, a lot of Americans only feel comfortable driving overweight (read: unmaneuverable) armored tanks that make them *more* likely to be involved in accidents. Statistics bear this out; SUVs are more likely to be involved in accidents than small cars.
As for safety: try over double the NTSB standards on roof and door crush strength, modelled with the same crash-survivability testing software that BMW uses, with normal car safety features (traction control, dual airbags... Actually the airbags are among the most advanced on the market -- in-seatbelt curtain airbags), and so on down the line. And I'll take a crash in a composite vehicle over a steel one any day. You ever seen the sort of 100+mph crashes of exotics that people walk away from? It's pretty amazing.
As for your last line, you're completely wrong on all counts. It's a 2+1 seater -- two full sized seats in the front and one seat for a small child in the back. And it has 16 cubic feet of trunk space, which is the size of your typical sedan's trunk. This is not a small car -- just an unusually shaped one. The unusual shape eliminates the presence of a normal backseat in exchange for the aerodynamics to gain its extreme efficiency.
Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?
While this car is impressive, I think the car designed in 1999 and going on sale in a year and a bit is much more amazing.
Just think, the pres of VW got 317 miles per (imperial) gallon driving this thing to a press conference. This is without any batteries or hybrid tech.
I would be happy with a runabout that achieved just half of that.
Below are links if you have not read about it yet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car
http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/gw/vw1litre.htm
I remember in Japan for many years seeing toilets with spigots at the top of the tank, not to mention dual flush, heated seats, and no need for paper, thanks to a water spray and air dryer. So I'd hardly call it a breakthrough product.
It's the 21st century and we're still rubbing our ass cracks with dead trees.
Losing the third wheel has a whole range of benefits. One, it gets the motorcycle classification, which allows them to have a lot more of a free hand in how to design things. To Aptera's credit, they're voluntarily doing the normal safety things, although some companies use the motorcycle classification to avoid things like crash tests. The other issues are practical, not legal. Given that the ideal shape is either a teardrop or a truncated teardrop (depending on the situation), the aerodynamic benefits of a central rear wheel are obvious. Another hypercar -- the Volkswagen 1L car -- has four wheels so it can retain the car classification, but it puts them right next to each other, basically making it effectively into a three wheeler. There are some major weight benefits from ditching that extra wheel. Not only do you lose the weight of a wheel and a tire, but you also lose the weight of a driveshaft, differential, etc. And not only does losing these parts cut weight, but it also cuts manufacture cost and time as well as maintenance costs (less to break). Lastly, three wheels improves vehicle response time since the average distance from the center of mass to the wheels gets reduced and the mass is decreased. So, lots of benefits.
With a "tadpole" configuration (two wheels in front, one in rear), you retain essentially all of the stability for driving in "normal" conditions. However, you lose stability in "unusual" conditions (a good example being skidding backwards or nearly backwards at high speeds). Basically, don't be an idiot and try to pull a J-turn in a tadpole trike unless you're fond of injuring yourself.
Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?
"lying" is a bit of a mis-statement.
We old guys remember the Aero Morgan - a three wheeler with a V-twin light aircraft engine at the front and a single rear wheel. In those days there was no front wheel drive, so it was far less advanced than the Aptera. They used to race these things, in Germany no less, and seeing a whole lot of them going through bends at over 100mph was a slightly worrying sight, but fun. Nowadays you may see one in the UK out on a rare sunny day. The point is, although very niche, they were a well proven design which attracted a devoted following. The Aptera might well do the same.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Can you use it to transport a family (2+2) to/from shopping?
Other than that it is a nice development.
Why do you need to take your whole family shopping? Can't you buy your Rice Krispies by yourself? ;-) And even if you needed to take the whole family, then you can just take two cars. Mom and kid in the Aptera; dad and kid in the other. The combined 150 mpg is still a LOT better than the average 20mpg SUV.
Very few people need to carry a Ford Living Room everywhere they go.
For those wanting four wheels, Volkswagen will soon have a 1L/100km (240mpg) car.
The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
If you want to show how good an autovehicle performs in terms of ecology, please provide these numbers:
1. Kg of CO2 emitted to produce one
2. Kg of CO2 emitted to run one for 100 Km
3. Kg of CO2 emitted to fully dispose one
Anything else is just buzzword and advertisement!
Maybe Computers will never be as intelligent as Humans.
For sure they won't ever become so stupid. [VR-1988]
The mixture includes flocculants, which cause suspended solids, heavy metals and parasites to clump together. The resulting "floc" can then be filtered out with a cotton cloth. Time-released chlorine kills bacteria and viruses. Within 30 minutes, about a teaspoon of the powder can treat 2.5 gal. of water. "The visual improvement is dramatic," says Eric Mintz, chief of the CDC's diarrheal diseases and epidemiology section.
A flying car would not even compare to this, not even a flying car that gets 300 miles per gallon. Having grown up with Star Trek (original series) this too me is the closest to Star Trek I have seen. A powder to make water safe. Screw that silly looking three wheeler, this helps the world far more than any vehicle.
I was very surprised not to be able to find mention of it on Wikipedia, even under http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portable_water_purification
It apparently never made it big in the news which is a disappointment, hopefully this "award" will give it its due
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Agreed. This car is way too impractical to ever see common use on American roads. Pit this versus a full size truck or even a semi and it has little chance. Honestly though, with the advances in TDI diesel engines and hybrid technologies, I feel the future is not in electric cars.
Well, nothing is going to go up against a semi and survive.
Semis are one of the 3 vehicles that always win: semis, buses, and trains.
"We need to get over this notion, that, for Apple to win... Microsoft must lose." - Steve Jobs, 1997
[Citation needed]
If you refer to this, it seats two and is hardly by any definition something that seats a whole family. (Not that you claimed that, but somehow it seemed implied) It'll be there in 2010 in limited numbers... Read: "expensive" (It says 20k€ to 30k€ in the wikipedia article)
I don't object with your post, just with that statement. We're far from there.
Also note that a 3L/100km car was in production for years but was scrapped because of low sales :-/
I don't have the link, but in the literature or on the forums somewhere there's a curve of the "efficiency" of the hybrid. The curve is asymptotic at about 110-120mpg, which would be your gasoline-only efficiency. Even with gas prices coming down a bit, the plug-in portion is still a fantastic economic deal compared to gasoline. The 10kWh battery will get you nearly 80 miles at real highway speeds, that's about $0.75 in electricity for me. And compared to the 13mpg I get around town in my F150, it's quite a bonus. Of course, I don't have $30k to spend on one, and if I did they wouldn't sell one to me 'cause I don't live in CA. On top if it, it still wouldn't pay me to buy one for economic reasons - I spend $3000 a year in fuel, and about 25% of the miles really do require a more rugged vehicle. At 6% interest, it would take 40 years to break even.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
And that's why you're not an economist.
Mom and kid in the Aptera; dad and kid in the other. The combined 150 mpg is still a LOT better than the average 20mpg SUV.
Right, since they're going to burn the fuel to drive the 20mpg SUV they might as well take a second vehicle as well.
They'll burn more gas that way, but hey, at least they can brag that their combined average is over 100MPG!
I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
>>>in the US anyways, there won't be over the air TV anymore in a little bit here.
To quote Bugs Bunny: "What a maroon." Of course there's going to be over-the-air television!!! Why do you think the U.S. Congress is giving away *billions* in free converter box coupons ($40 each). Please don't post false information.
FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
As a bonus, this one looks amazing (saw one in person this summer): http://spyder.brp.com/
That car looks suspiciously like a motorcycle.
I agree though it certainly beats out the Type-1e in the looks department. I don't understand why new-tech people insist on making such horrendously ugly vehicles. If they actually made them look like traditional cars they may have a chance of catching on.
I get that the design helps them achieve 300mpg, but seriously, no one is going to drive a Type-1e on a highway. It looks like it'd crumple like tin foil.
As a Spyder owner, I can attest that it is a very stable vehicle. It has several safety features (warning: flash site) namely its VSS (Vehicle Stability System) that makes sure you can't/don't high side it like conventional trikes.
Its a first generation vehicle, but its been developed for around 10 years and minus a few minor complaints they totally hit a home run! I can confidently say that I am very happy with my purchase. But I must warn you, don't buy one unless you really like attention because everyone will come up to you and have a conversation.
When I have a kid, I want to put him in one of those strollers for twins and then run around the mall looking frantic.
The thing is to get along together, not just go buy something and get back.
Besides that, if you keep splitting people in many cars, you get a worst traffic.
Am I eval()? - http://www.monst3r.com.br
So one parent can't go anywhere with both kids unless the other parent goes also, and what about families with three kids?
As for shopping, if the wife can't take the kids to the store during the day, she has to hire a baby sitter. Instead, taking the children shopping is an excellent teaching opportunity, so they can learn how to behave in public and how to shop within a budget just to name two.
Can you use it to transport a family (2+2) to/from shopping?
I'm definitely into letting someone else do the hauling these days...
- Dairy delivery to my door (Oberweiss)
- Peapod delivery of Groceries
- Schwan's delivery for other tasty items. They have the best bacon.
Actually helps minimize the impulse buying in the store. Otherwise, you do need to be able to haul your family for many purposes. This car will be a great commuter so you can leave the mini-van home unless needed.
I love the sound of distortion in the morning -- webcommando
Well, Morgan used to make a 3 wheel sports car, and they used to be able to lap Brooklands at over a ton (all power from a big twin bike engine).
The configuration's still available today - here's a video of an old Moggie and a Grinnall Scorpion being let out to play.
Pretty stable, no?
One swallow does not a fellatrix make
As for the basic economics of going all-electric with this one I ran some numbers of my own and determined my Prius cost me as much as $5.60 per commute per day (66mi,3.50/gal,42+mpg winter with a lead foot, but usually around 47), and the Aptiva (80 wh/mi, BG&E rates) would only cost me $0.63 for the all-electric version. Doing solar would drive the cost up a little but it would still be far cheaper than being all gas powered as I am today. Not only would is save me money but it is also the first electric car that is capable of doing that 66 mi commute on one charge, as I would otherwise have to get my office to install an electric meter in the parking lot if I had any other electric vehicle. I'd buy one today, as this is almost exactly the car I wanted to design and build for myself, but the bummer is the car is only available to residents of California. Anyone out there want to take delivery for me? I'd just have to figure out how to charge it every day for the drive back home to the east coast. :}
If you absolutely need more than 2+1 seating (i.e., you're only going to have one car and/or rarely have anyone in the household who travels by themselves or with one adult and one small child), then you're right; it's not for you. However, a huge portion of the American population is not in that situation. It's sad watching a hummer going down the freeway carrying only the driver. What a waste.
If you do need more than 2+1 seating, not only are there many other EVs coming out from other manufacturers in the next few years (although no other true electric hypercars that I've seen), but Aptera's next model, codenamed "Palomar", is to be a four-wheel, four seater. I'd expect it to be somewhat more expensive and probably ~30-40% less energy efficient, but hey, four seats. Of course, with the credit crisis, I imagine it might be a while before they can bring it to market.
Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?
If you pick a 1955 VW Beetle as the car then perhaps you can. If you pick a modern car then no, you can't. A modern car car can pull around 1g of deceleration (sports cars more, SUVs less). To stop in 1/3rd distance of a car decelerating at 1g you'd have to be decelerating at 3g. Even if there existed a tyre compound which could give you that much grip without downforce (no such compound exists) you'd surely fly over the bars unless you're strong enough to hold a handstand with two guys on your back.
Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
A two seater really is a non-starter for most people with families. It's not just old-fashioned ideas. Nobody is going to want to split up their family every time they want to drive somewhere. Many people could possibly use an efficient two-seater for solo driving, and then have another car for hauling the family. However, most people would rather have one car that does it all instead of the expense (and the space needs) of two.
Old Citroens used to have covered rear wheels, to change them you just jack the car up and the wheel drops (relative to the car) enough for access. Looking at the Aptera the wheels are too deep for that, so I guess there must be access panels.
Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
...and a major cause of air pollution is the low-speed stop-and-go driving brought on by traffic jams. No matter what you're driving, it'll be more efficient at a constant speed. It's hard to maintain a constant speed, though, when the roads are inadequate for the traffic they need to carry.
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.