Slashdot Mirror
Open Source Car — 20 Year Lease, Free Fuel For Life
ruphus13 writes "The race for a hyper-fuel-efficient car is on in a big way. Now, Riversimple has tried to leverage the knowledge of the masses to bring its vision to reality soon with a car that gives the equivalent of 300 miles to the gallon. 'The idea to build an open source car isn't a new one, but you've got to give vehicle design company Riversimple credit for originality. The company plans to unveil its first car in London later this month, a small two-seater that weighs roughly 700 pounds. If you agree to lease one for 20 years (yes, 20), Riversimple will throw in the cost of fuel for the lifetime of the lease...The team decided to release the car's designs under an open source license in order to speed up the time it takes to develop the vehicle while also driving down the cost of its components.'"
The company plans to unveil its first car in London later this month, a small two-seater that weighs roughly 700 pounds.
A car that will never sell anywhere in the US due to total inability to pass crash safety test. I'm actually surprised that it can be sold anywhere in the first world, to be honest.
Well I guess that means they aren't planning on marketing this in the Northeast, or anywhere that there's occasionally snow on the ground. I doubt that much of that 700 lbs would *not* be riddled with rust long before that lease would run out. Seriously, why lease a car for 20 years? And what'd the lease payment be? Not to mention the fact that you could probably just buy the damn thing (or maybe even a nicer car) using a 20 year car loan and cover the fuel out of pocket for far less than what you'd pay these jokers. Effectively locking in the cost of fuel for 20 years may sound attractive, but in practice it's more likely a win-win for the company --sure, you don't pay extra when fuel prices go up, but you also miss out on the downward fuel price fluctuations. The company is certain to make more money from you than you'll get out in fuel in any case, since if the prices are such that the deal would seem to work out in your favor, the company will just go bankrupt.
It looks similar in size to the G-Wiz, an all-electric car which can only be legally driven in the UK because it's not classed as a "car", it's a "quadricycle". Quadricycles are basically thought of as a four-wheel motorcycle, so there are almost no safety requirements.
There is little to no chance of these being legal to drive in an US state, other than those that allow "neighborhood vehicles", like golf carts and Japanese Kei-class cars - here in Ilinois you can drive those on streets that have a maximum speed limit of 35 MPH, but no faster.
I especially recommend Clarkson's G-Wiz review. The G-Wiz is beaten by a table in the drag race test. Golf carts move faster and are roomier.
Putting moderation advice in your
If you RTA you'll see that the bodywork is made from carbon composite. I don't think it's that unreallistic for a car to still be going after 20 years - how many cars are there around on the roads from 1989/1990? Still quite a few (esp. Japanese made), in some parts of the world the majority of cars are that old or older.
But this post is a great illustration of how many people view cars as throwaway, disposable products, good for only 10 years. Cars don't just impact the environment with CO2 emissions, the material and energy cost of production, maintenance and disposal have to be taken into account, and it's about time seeing a manufacturer taking responsibility in this regard, rather than cashing in on the easy profits of throwaway consumerism
Car analogy please.
I read through the article and a lot of blogs covering Riversimple. Here's what it looks like under the hood. It seems too early and preliminary for adoption. "Open Source" seems to have been employed purely as a buzzword to generate interest. Most of the detail is actually at the 40 Fires foundation website which will probably release design schematics. Their FAQ answers questions I had in mind and is a good place for a starting read. The codename for this car is Hybran. The EU welcomes Hydrogen cars as a strong "Green" alternative.
If you do compare it to other initiatives like OSCar, you would find this option from Riversimple probably at a better stage of adoption. But until they unveil their prototypes (16-Jun-2009 is not far) and manufacturing goals (however they intend to go about it,) consumers will be skeptical about adoption. They first have to hit a note on consumers _wanting_ it or _needing_ it before proposing an attractive business model. Most of the prior comments reflect that we are not yet ready. Design momentum on OSCar seems to have stalled in the year 2006.
In contrast another vehicle release earlier this year happened in India with a lot of buzz about a $2,500 car, the Nano from India. This car _can_ do more than 56 mpg on Gasoline. It isn't green, but you can grab one, drive one and feel much safer than the electric counterparts that roam about the cities. This car went through at least 2 yrs of testing because the average consumer was scared about safety. The adoption was further slowed down by slow manufacturing response from Tata Motors.
India has allowed an Electric car (REVA) to be used within City limits (for road safety and range concerns) manufactured by Reva. The vehicle (a modest 4 wheeler) which comes in multiple flavors has low adoption rates in cities which allow it. This car through evolution has been heavier than India's top selling gasoline small-car the Maruti Suzuki 800cc 4 seater, and offers lesser range within a city. It has a very short range of 80-100km and requires battery packs to be replaced every two years (or depending on usage.) From June, 2001 the adoption has been very slow. During July, 2008 at least 260 Reva's (multiple models) were sold which is a record high. The Reva is priced at a one time price tag of close to $6,500 with an installed set of batteries. These have to be replaced at about $1000 every year. There's some comprehensive information and links on the Wikipedia Article (Reva). The cost has been a factor in slowing down adoption added to the fact that electric charges are required almost on a nightly basis. India has welcomed the car with reduced parking charges and several cuts. The G-Whiz model sold outside India is far too pricey ($12000 in Chile) and does not enjoy these environment friendly regulatory benefits.
For crowded cities in India where pollution is a heavy problem, Electrical cars with limited range for office commuters who'd prefer some shade (where public transport is a little inconvenient with timings) has received early adoption. i would presume that countries facing rapid development and growth rates will have to take this more seriously. Scaling public transport infrastructure has always been a challenge in many developing countries owing to a myriad of reasons. The basis for creating indices to track air pollution is outlined quite well in this paper (PDF) from
No Greater Friend, No Greater Enemy! (Lucius Cornelius Sulla)
The Smart ForTwo weighs over 2.5 times as much (1880 lbs.) in large part to the hardware required to pass those crash tests.
How well do, for example, motorcycles pass crash tests?
Motorcycles don't. You get into a wreck with another vehicle, you die. We refer to motorcycle riders as "organ donors" in the US.
[RIAA] says its concern is artists. That's true, in just the sense that a cattle rancher is concerned about its cattle.
Cars should be banned within city limits. This simple rule will save more lives than the last 30 years of cancer research. Cars are like cockroaches, getting rid of them in cities would be a blessing.
That's just plain stupid. Take a look at the map of the city I live in. It's 30 miles in diameter, and there's nothing but other cities outside those city limits. There simply is no means by which a mass transit system could replace the road system in my city, as there is absolutely no "center" that people go to--- everyone lives somewhere else and goes to a different place to work. You probably live in one of those "cities" with 300K people that can easily be served by two light rail lines and a dozen buses. When you have a greater metropolitan area that's home to 12 million plus people that spans a dozen city entities in two counties, mass transit becomes a much bigger problem than can be solved by an idiotic handwave of "just ban cars from city limits".
I won't even begin to address the issue of what you consider "cars" and what constitutes a legitimately necessary vehicle. No... I will. Do you expect supermarkets to get food deliveries by bus? Is the plumber going to bring tools and 10-foot lengths of copper pipe to your house on the subway? Are old people who can barely walk expected to somehow drag 30 pounds of groceries home a kilometer from the nearest transit station? No, I'm guessing you'd suggest some sort of "permit" system that'd allow certain "special" classes of people to have personal vehicles... and like any such system, those with money would be able to game it and drive as they please. So what you're really suggesting is that poor people should be banned from driving in the city.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
Cars are only a necessity in the US for most people because most of the US lacks decent public transport system and because cities are planned based on a population that travels everywhere by car. Start building decent transport systems and make planners consider pedestrians and bikes and the number of people who need cars to get around will plummet quickly. With better public transportation, other aspects (such as denser downtown shopping areas instead of megastores spread out over large areas as in some of the more sprawling areas in the US will follow.
"How well does a bike work in the rain?"
I love it, only on slashdot. Mod parent up for being a true geek! Only a true geek who doesn't do daylight or weather query whether bikes work in the rain.
For your information, pretty well. Stopping distance is slightly longer and like motorbikes and cars, performance is somewhat reduced.
People who use bicycles in wet weather handle the rain by using "coats". They put their luggage in waterproof containers which keeps the rain (a type of "weather") off the contents.
I cycle to work and back, 8 miles each way, any weather apart from ice and heavy snow. You put on a coat, and waterproof trousers. Gortex is a wonderful invention. Waterproof panniers keep my laptop nice and dry. No problem.
Some people wear specialist cycling clothing, I just use my walking gear.
I'm guessing you're not much of an outdoors kind of person.