Slashdot Mirror
Volkswagen Unveils 313 MPG XL1, Slates Production For 2013
An anonymous reader writes "Volkswagen just unveiled a new car at the Qatar Motor Show that gets an astounding 100km for less than a liter of diesel fuel – that's the equivalent of 313 miles per gallon! The XL1 concept car is an upgraded version of the VW L1 vehicle, and it features an ultra-efficient diesel engine in addition to an electric motor that is powered by a lithium-ion battery. The vehicle is currently slated to enter production in 2013 and is expected to cost approximately $29,500." Autoblog calls it 261 mpg, which isn't too shabby, either. At less than a thousand pounds empty, I hope this comes with a really good bike lock.
Just wow. Speechless. Very cool.
I wonder what its 0-60mph times are? Top speed?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Okay, so expect some bumps the 2013 year - but it doesn't look like an overgrown scooter either!
But maybe by 2015 a $100 gas card might last a month!
Heh - But how expensive is recharging the battery?
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Can I drop those engines into my SmartCar?
Nope.
Film at 11: Crash.
I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
It's great to see diesel-electric hybrid technology reach the consumer market so quickly!
In all seriousness though, this is very neat stuff (and I'm sure someone will point out how my submarine reference is totally inapplicable...).
While the tech is very cool and impressive, I always laugh at cars like this with a "sport" mode. In this case, the car has a "sport" mode of 39hp, for an astounding 99mph. I don't think the type of person who will want this car cares about driving super fast, and the type of person that does want a fast car won't want this one. Why try catering to both markets?
If you can't convince them, convict them.
...and will not touch it with enthusiasm mainly because its products lose their value so much as compared to the competition in every category.
In addition, the VW is quite complex even when it comes to a simple oil or a timing belt change. That's my beef with VW.
I wish them well on this one though.
This car is what the Green Hornet will be fighting criminals with from 2011 on.
This seems to be a better article. It mentions that the weight of the vehicle is around 1,750 pounds. Not sure where TFS got their figure of less than a thousand pounds from. They are also speculating that the 261 mpg figure does not count the contribution of the batteries.
261*1.2 = 313
Yeah it looks like a futuristic car from 1980's vision of 2013, but how will it do in a crash test?
Just wait till safety advocates and would-be buyers cry out for anti-hummer-intrusion bars, 50 airbags, electric windows, heated seats, A/C and in-board GPS and DVD players, and when this thing hits the road for real, it'll be over a ton and get 40 mpg, just like the others
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
"of 313 miles per gallon..Autoblog calls it 261 mpg,..."
and in the actual article, the link to the second page is "http://...volkswagen-to-unveil-235mpg-car-at-2011-qatar-motor-show/2/"
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
US citizen here. The comparison of figures is not surprising. At the rate the US is going, we will for a long time be playing catch-up to things "green" and vehicles diesel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevy_volt
When gas is 5$ a gallon it will.
This American drives an S40. I actually have a pickup that rarely gets driven, and is only used for (shocker) hauling stuff when I need to. My S40 is terrible when it comes to picking up lumber.
Saying Android is a family of phones is akin to saying Linux is a family of PCs.
There are a large number of Americans who couldn't drive a car like this. Where I'm from, this car would be feasible three months out of the year. For the other nine months, I doubt this car would keep anybody safe in a snow/ice/wind environment. But guess what... my truck keeps me safe those 9 months of the year, and I wouldn't trade it for anything.
If I lived in a warm metropolis, I'd love to have a vehicle like this. 313mpg is crazy-good and I've never known VW to put out a bad product. However, this just isn't practical for my neck of the woods.
The ratio of 313:261 is the same as for Imperial:US gallon. The 313 claim was reported by Timon Singh who is apparently a resident of the UK, and thus likely more familiar with Imperial than US gallons.
If they spend so much time one getting the weight down for better fuel efficiency how much will it get hindered with people and stuff in the car. Morbidly Obese people could be 400 or 500 lbs and still be able to actually drive the car. You get two in there and you actually double the cars weight... How much will it cut fuel effiency with extra weight. Heck 4 men at 250 lbs would more the double its weight.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Being able to see behind you, that is so 1992. Should be fun when police cars try to pull over these beauties for lack of proper safety equipment.
GM, Volkswagen, etc are pushing these super high MPG figures to tweak the CAFE numbers so they can keep making cars like the Corvette, Tourareg, Phaeton and for Volkswagen's parent company, Volkswagen AG - Lamborghini, Bentley, and Bugatti.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_Average_Fuel_Economy
For cars that have an electric propulsion component that is charged off-line (i.e., not by the on-board hydrocarbon engine), calculations of miles/gallon or km/l are highly suspect as they assume a certain pattern of driving. Figures such as 313 miles per gallon can be considered accurate only the the likes of governments (e.g., the United States) who can fiddle with accounting in the most obscene ways. Hell, why not just round up to infinite miles/gallon since that is what a person who drives only short distances between charges will get.
the difference in the MPG will be cause by the difference in gallon sizes between USA and the rest of the world. US Gallon approx 3.78 litres Imperial Gallons: approx 4.54 Litres. so - and imperial gallon is 1.2 the size of US gallon. 313MPG/1.2 = 261MPG. And this is why the US should move to the damn metric system, or at least use the same size gallon as the rest of the world.
Nope.
Film at 11: Crash.
One word: Rollover. Sadly, many places in the US still have decreasing radius turns (cloverleaf off-ramp), and this, combined with the dangerously high center-of-gravity of the average SUV results in statistically abnormal rollover rates. In fact, driving an SUV is not only more dangerous for the SUV driver, but everyone else around.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
Why would you? If I lived in Alberta(or the canuck plains) I'd own a pickup, well if I lived in any of the plains states too. Why? Because we get some pretty extreme weather from one day to the next. 10" of snow? Meh go on with your day in North America(unless you're in parts of the mid-east). 10" of snow in Europe? Countries shut down. Get 5.6' of snow in 2 days in Canada? Whatever, life as normal.
Luckily the most we get in a 'dump' here is around 3' at one time. But 12-25" of snow in a single day is pretty common. Sure I'm simply talking about winter, but whatever. I'm sure you'll come up with all kinds of reasons why cars with 4-6" ground clearances will work just fine.
Om, nomnomnom...
I guess it's a good thing they don't have snow or ice in Germany. My Hyundai does just fine in Wisconsin winters, most problems with small cars and snow and ice come down to poor driving.
Sure. The moment they build a vehicle that gets 200 mpg whilst carrying our family and three rescue dogs, towing the trailer I use to gather firewood, and doesn't cost like a lamborghini, I'm all over that sucker.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
This may be my American sensibilities showing through, but what I want to know is why, for the love of god, the European standard for fuel economy is liters/100km? Why not km/liter, which is a much more convenient format for any sort of day-to-day use, and is in keeping with the standard format measurement of efficiency (Output/Input)?
What advantage does using L/100km convey? I am honestly interested
"Cheeze it!" - Bender
The vehicle is currently slated to enter production in 2013 and is expected to cost approximately $29,500.
That would be one hell of a loss per vehicle for VW if raw materials cost more than $100k.
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler. - Albert Einstein
Just like Florida and the rest of the south shutdown, Michigan goes "Meh." In the same way Italy and France probably shut down while Russia/Sweden/Norway probably go 'meh'.. Lumping all of Europe together is as bad as lumping all of the states together.
VW says they will sell these for $29,500.
Lose value? You must not have been looking at the TDIs.
In 2006 I was looking for a new car, the Golf TDI was just the ticket. Only problem was getting one. We looked for a few months for a used one. We found a number of 2000-2004 Golf TDIs with 50k+ miles on them. The cheapest one was $16,000, and had close to 100k miles on it. We finally tracked down a new 2006 model and paid $21k for it.
We actually refinanced the loan, using the Golf as collatoral, so we could merge our two car loans together a few years ago. Yup, over 40k miles on it at the time, and the blue book for the TDI was still 18k.
I did pay to have someone else do the timing belt. It took him about 45 minutes, but he did have a number of specialty tools. I probably could have done it myself, but it would have taken the better part of a day and the cost of the tools.
Over 90k miles now, and other than the regular maintenance, the only issues I've ever had with it was a bad oxygen sensor (covered under the warrenty), some pin prick paint bubbles (manufacturer defect, VW wouldn't cover them), and a slipping clutch after some exceptionally spirited racing through a hilly course. And I still get ~44 mpg on my daily commute to and from work (mostly highway/interstate).
If this little thing is half the car that the Golf TDI is, it'll be worth every penny.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
"Production" consists of 100 cars worldwide. That's less than one tenth of the number of EV1 cars produced.
Until I can buy one at my local VW dealership, it ain't real and it ain't relevant. The world is full of "someday I'm gonna make this".
In any event, I have serious doubts it will meet US safety standards. As for the mileage claims... a low cD and a low frontal area and all that are nice, but you can't cheat physics. It takes a certain amount of energy to move a car around, and there's no getting around that. Even a little 50cc scooter only gets a little over 100mpg, and we're being told a two-passenger car capable of going 100mph with a vehicle weight of 1750 pounds gets three times that? I doubt it. In fact, I'll just plain call bullshit; that figure has to include propulsion from a full battery pack. Show me distance traveled where the battery pack has the same state at the beginning and conclusion of the run while burning 1 gallon of fuel; THAT is the "miles per gallon" that can ethically be claimed.
All that being said, it's not a bad-looking car (as eco-pharisee-mobiles go). I'd like to see it succeed, but first it has to be real and it has to be honest. There's also the little matter than I'm 6'2" tall with a 36" inseam. If it only fits oompa-loompas like the Lotus Elise (which I absolutely do not fit into, and believe me I've tried), forget it.
Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
I doubt you ever really need to do all of those things simultaneously, and you could almost certainly rent a capable vehicle on those occasions when you would.
Of course, that's not your real point, you just want to make excuses for driving a gas guzzling eyesore while retaining some smug self-righteous superiority over anyone who would dare to call you a fool for it.
Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
Amazingly it even manages to go 250 miles before using any petrol! It's almost as if the vehicle had some magic store of energy! 60KWh of magic energy!
Are we going to get endless BS milage figures gained from running hybrid cars off of fully charged batteries for these tests?
I can say with 100 percent certainty that my car does infinity MPG! I tested it with the engine off and it rolling down a hill but that's still about as valid as this crap.
Has been rear ended by two different sedans now. Both of them crumpled somewhat. I think I see a small scratch in my rear fender. The Tacoma's only a small pickup (it's not the latest version) and I've been really pleased with how solid it is and I can live with the gas milage considering I don't drive more than 4000 miles/yr. I can't see this VW surviving much in the way of a minor accident, even if the occupants are unhurt; it looks to me as if the car's structural components are largely sacrificial.
I wonder what kind of a crash rating a production version of it would get.
Nullius in verba
313 (miles per Imperial gallon) = 110.8 kilometers per litre (says Google). So 0.90 litres for 100 km. That's quite a lot less than a litre.
Then who cares.
Sadly?
If you can't drive it on our roads get them off the street. SUVs and their drivers suck,
790 kg (1,741.7 lb) 970 kg (2,138.5 lb),
USA 1,750 lb (790 kg) 2,145 lb (973 kg)
Quite the improvement from the 1970's :rolleyes: Exotic materials and that's all they could save?
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Vehicles tuned to efficiency seem to take a big hit from peak mileage depending on driving conditions.
For the Prius, a long flat trip in nice weather results in 60mpg. Take short (less than 5 minutes) trips and lose ~5-10mpg due to warm up time. Drive in cold weather and lose ~5mpg to engine heat loss. Run in cold/wet weather with the front defrost on and lose ~10mpg.
It would be interesting to see this new car tested in those environments.
I live in an area with such snowfall, I drive a little toyota car. Does fine.
Considering sweden and norway have shut effectively down for 6-15" of snow? Yeah that's pretty mediocre. Russia and Canada are pretty close to what extreme winter weather can be.
Om, nomnomnom...
...even if it only goes half that, it's still a huge improvement over what I have now.
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
How quickly we resort to abuse.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Carbon fiber raw materials are super cheap. That is why all the car companies are trying to find ways to automate layup.
Because sometimes you want to sacrifice a bit of efficiency for the extra safety of doing something like coming up to traffic speed more quickly on a very short entrance ramp.
Many Slashdot users seem to think performance is all about unsafe driving; those who are experienced and careful drivers know that anything that more quickly lets you remove a speed differential between you and traffic (either acceleration or braking) is more safe.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Where's a -1:Moron mod? Or even -1:Wrong?
I live in the prairies. I drive a little tiny car. It has around 6-8" of clearance.
I have never had a problem. In the heart of a Winnipeg winter. But then again, I'm not a moron behind the wheel. I don't need a big truck to make up for a small.....amount of driving skill.
Drive your gas-chugging truck all you want...I'll happily commute at 50MPG (give or take).
The comment so lame you had to try it twice?
Saying Android is a family of phones is akin to saying Linux is a family of PCs.
Trucks are actually the worst handling vehicles on the road, especially in slick conditions. Four wheel drive and more ground clearance to plow through snow does not equate to winter safety.
You'd be better off putting on some x-country skiis and carying the thing if it snows.
I'll bet you live in such an area where you have effective plowing of roads that let you drive a little toyota car just fine. I drive a saturn with ~7" of ground clearance in such an area, where plowing can be 'hit or miss' at times, it doesn't work so well.
Om, nomnomnom...
If you won't RTFA, at least RTFS:
...when cars like these are being sold for nothing due to the cost of battery replacement, that I can get my hands on one. I wonder what it will weigh when all the batteries and motors are removed and replaced with a large displacement V8.
You are basing your assumption on the yuppy town based pickup/truck owners. Out side of cities there are legitimate uses for vehicles to haul large objects, traverse poor quality surfaces, etc. The jerk off driving a truck around Los Angeles will continue to do so as long as he can afford fuel because it feeds his ego. The rest of the country will continue to do it until you design a fuel efficient vehicle with hauling capacity and reliability. Don't forget, fuel efficiency is one of the key determining factors for the biggest purchasers of trucks/SUVs, unfortunately it's not easy to balance fuel efficient with 4 wheel drive and a large framed vehicle.
Personally I don't have a pickup, but I grew up in areas that you need something along those lines, and need to borrow one from fiends/family at least once or twice a year. If no one around me had one, I probably would have to buy one of my own to have around when I needed it.
Yes, but do you really need such a powerful car just to drive your body to work? It makes more sense to do what a poster above does: Have 1 car for the hauling, and a 2nd main car for daily use.
Most Americans own 2-3 cars anyway.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
_ we have a lot of snow, ice, storm + vast rain here in Germany. Much more than sun. AND over 55 mio. cars on the street. Stuffed with electronic of every kind. Snow + ice isn't a big issue anymore. Furthermore we have partially NO speed limit, but 160 km/h is fast enough to get not chased by the "Luftwaffe" of BMX, Audi + Porsche.
I'll take a car with proper snow tires over an SUV.
The SUV may get going with 4WD, even with crappy tires, where a car with crappy tires wouldn't, but it won't turn or brake nearly as well, due to the added mass and higher center of gravity. Add in snow tires on the car, and it'll beat the SUV in just about every way.
A unibody SUV is also more survivable in a collision (body on frame SUVs, OTOH, usually aren't), but the "crashing is inevitable" school of thought has resulted in terrible driving being the norm, and then big huge tanks that get into crashes that could otherwise be avoidable, and result in soldiers needlessly dying.
Now, this 261 mpg (not 313 - the 313 is using a different size gallon from what we use in the US) on the NEDC cycle (which allows for a fully charged battery), 121 mpg on an empty battery (calculated from the range figures and tank size that VW gave) car is made for Germany first. In Germany, snow tires are serious business.
So, there will be snow tires available for this car.
Sure you want to bet against it doing well in winter?
The point is, a lot of us can only afford to buy and insure 1 car. The cost of the gas is almost negligible. Whether the car gets 20mpg or 200mpg makes almost no difference in the total ownership and operating costs. So if you have a family of 4, and want to be able to carry some small amount of cargo, you're probably better off (financially) buying an SUV or Minivan, and getting by with just 1 vehicle over having to own multiple vehicles or having to rent a vehicle every 2 weeks when you need a vehicle with a specific purpose.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
I know you also have wind, it goes woosh. The same noise that you missing his joke just made.
Where I live now yes, where I lived in the past and still often travel no. Get some snow tires.
As the price of gas increases this will change.
Keep out of the Mojave desert with this thing. It'll probably be blown right off the roads out there.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Prices have been coming down as more production of carbon fiber ramped up. For most of the last 10 years, the majority of production went into the aerospace industry. There's now enough production capacity to fulfill general automotive needs, too.
The real problem I see here is that like plastic parts, a break in a carbon fiber part means the whole piece has to be replaced and color matched. Metal parts can often just be banged back out and the paint touched up. In cars of yore, chrome bumpers didn't even need to be painted at all--just bolt the sucker back on. Plastic bumpers these days are a pain.
Not a typewriter
ummm, move to Munich. They get comparable amounts of snow. And this car will be sold there.
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, though I'm not yet sure about the universe. - A Einstein
According to this article the XL1 is a concept car and will never enter production:
"Volkswagen says the XL1 is a concept rather than a production model preview, but the technology used within it could provide clues about how a future VW Golf TDI diesel economy winner could emerge."
http://cars.uk.msn.com/news/photos.aspx?cp-documentid=155973354
I'll be laughing when I pass those Mercedes 240D's.
SUVs and their drivers suck
Over-generalize much?
When it can pull my boat it will.
"What kind of music do pirates listen to?" -Paul Maud'dib
"Yeeeaaarrrrr n' Bee!!" -Stilgar, Leader of Sietch Tabr
> Yes, but do you really need such a powerful car just to drive your body to work?
Um, no. Nobody asked me what I drive to work. Today I took the bug. (35mpg) When the weather is fair, I take the motorcycle. (55+mpg)
The other whining gits in this thread screeching at the top of their little-girl voices seem to think that ownership of a heavy work vehicle precludes the driver gets some perverse satisfaction out of hundred buck fillups at the pump. If you're celebrity environmentalist Ashton Kutcher, that might be true. But even if I didn't think that was profoundly stupid, it's way above my pay grade.
My point, in it's entirety, was that if there existed a vehicle that would do the same job, for a reasonable price, or even a reasonable markup, that got 200mpg, I'd be right there in line. I own a truck because I have work that requires it. I don't sleep with it. I speculate that even people who own a truck or SUV because they think they're cool, don't like paying at the pump any more than I do. Maybe that's what's really needed -- a 1,700 pound mostly-plastic and styrofoam hybrid that looks like an H2. (Watch out for the sail area.) Who knows, maybe it'll catch on. Although I personally think, Mr. Kutcher excepted, a lot of people driving work vehicles are mistaken by pencil-necks as having some perverse desire to solo in the largest vehicles they can fit on the road just to personally piss them off.
These concept cars and special projects are valuable because they advance the art, and maybe some tiny part of that will eventually roll into vehicles actually driven by the rank and file. Wake me when we get there. In the mean time, watching the vitriol (present company excepted) makes for an amusing read.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
If safety features were not required on mass produced vehicles, cars like this could actually be in the US! I forget what "mass produced" is defined as. It is either a run of 100+ or 1000+ cars. If you pays soemone to do a full custom car, you could easily get 100+ mpg but you'd also probably pay $100K for it. The US needs to get it's head out of it's ass and let safety features be something people want, not require. I'd take 100+ mpg with no air bags any day. I know what the trade off is.
Point being, all those safety features add extra weight. If an automaker would make a sub 1000 pound single seater for $10K, everyone would buy the damned thing. A 4 wheeled t-rex is what I really want. But there is that stupid "mass produced" clause again. Hard for a 4 wheeled t-rex to pass safety regulations since 4 wheel makes it a car, not a motorcycle.
t-rex:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campagna_T-Rex
No way I would drive that death trap here in Upper Michigan. Especially during the winter. One collision with a deer and its game over.
That's not to say I don't try to drive something smaller. My Pontiac Sunbird is about as far down in size as I feel the environment here permits.
Why bother producing diesel/petrol cars for the future? electric is the way forward
Hang on - aren't most pickups rear-wheel drive, with very little weight over the driven wheels when unloaded (as they invariably are), and therefore the absolute worst thing to drive in snow?
160 km/h is fast enough to get not chased by the "Luftwaffe" of BMX, Audi + Porsche.
Aww, c'mon - even in Germany they aren't that fast on a BMX. I'm not knocking the commitment or the muscle power but the gearing would need thighs like a Russian weightlifter to get one near 100mph.
The pictures of this car raise two small and eminently answerable questions:
1. How do you see out the rear window to back up?
2. How do you change the rear tires? Are there removable panels I'm not seeing?
"Imaginary solutions to real problems."
That is one seriously ugly, slow car. The automotive industry as a whole tried to do the same thing in the eighties and early nineties, abandoning the looks and performance that worked before in favor of better fuel economy and "practicality". The cars made in that era are now the lowest valued vehicles of any generation, and it's not because gas has gotten cheaper. I don't care if it's a perpetual motion machine; I'd rather walk than drive something like that. How embarrassing.
If it ever makes it to market, you can bet that it'll have a garbage Prius interior in it, too. Show me something with high mileage to fill the niche of a 335i coupe or S4, and we'll talk. I can get either of those in damn nice shape around the price range they are planning for that XL1. Probably cost less to maintain, too.
Later on down the road when gasoline is spent to the point where it's no longer a feasible fuel source, we'll find something else to replace it, and continue using the cars we have or something with similar form and function. Ultra-low horsepower cars like that one are not the solution.
Like that factors in the buying decision of your typical American...
One word: Rollover. Sadly, many places in the US still have decreasing radius turns (cloverleaf off-ramp), and this, combined with the dangerously high center-of-gravity of the average SUV results in statistically abnormal rollover rates. In fact, driving an SUV is not only more dangerous for the SUV driver, but everyone else around.
1995 called. They want their single-word-explains-all talking point back.
Advice: on VPS providers
Actually, that's not true. The big SUVs are in fact safer than most other cars: http://www.iihs.org/research/hldi/composite_cls.aspx?y=2007-2009&cls=2&sz=2&sort=name
How come our laptops' Li-Ion batteries still deteriorate with age and can only supply measly battery power after a couple of years of use, yet they can be trusted enough to power these autos? Can someone please explain...
WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
You forgot it should cost $10'000 max, have 0-60 less than 6 seconds (with the trailer), etc.
I lived in Alberta for most of my life. A pickup isn't the ideal vehicle. Pickups, even four wheel drive ones, usually have very light rear ends. That means they slip. Slipping in the winter isn't good. If you do own a pickup, about all you can do is pile weight in the box.
Strangely, the ideal vehicle seems to be one of the minivans with decent ground clearance. The things are great on ice. A close second is a small car with good ground clearance. I had a '92 Grand Am that could make it over things that stopped a Jeep SUV.
The functionality I already have will be fine, thanks.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Pickups really suck in the sloppy conditions, the weight distribution is way front heavy. If you don't have 4wd or a half ton in the bed you just sit and spin.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
No most pickups are now 4wd for that reason, so the problem now is keeping the rear wheels behind the front wheels when you try to stop the truck.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Most Americans own 1 car, if they're lucky. Most FAMILIES own 2-3 cars, but that's very, very different, and often, all will need to be in-use at the same time, so one woefully impractical car won't be acceptible even there.
I work with a lot of very wealthy individuals, and next to none of them have multiple cars that only they drive. How could that even work? You'd have to hire someone to drive it for you, or make multiple trips when moving. And why would anyone want two vehicles? Frequently moving your stuff between the two, doing twice the maintenance, paying for twice the insurance, registration, etc. And what for? The base cost of vehicle ownership is high, and only goes down significantly when you put a large number of miles on it. Just the normal bluebook devaluation of your spare vehicle will easily surpass the added cost of an inefficient car, for all but the most extreme commuters.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
The funny thing is, back when gas was 50 cents a gallon, they made cars that could carry 6 people, a decent amount of cargo, and haul a trailer. These days, with $4/gallon gas, you NEVER hear the words "station wagon".
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Ford probe front whacked with a Honda civic ev backend...
Not sure it'll attract many.
It's already that in Australia, and it's as much as $8.50 per gallon in the UK
Advanced users are users too!
Volkswagen sells sooooo many cars that every Lambo, Bently, and Bugatti they sell could get 0.01 mpg and it wouldn't noticeably change their CAFE. Also since they'll only be selling 100 of this car, it will have no real effect on their CAFE numbers.
Eventually...
Strangely, the ideal vehicle seems to be one of the minivans with decent ground clearance. The things are great on ice. A close second is a small car with good ground clearance.
My Toyota Townace fits that description but it still drives a hell of a lot better with a load over the rear axle.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Unfortunately there are now 6,000,000,000+ people on the planet and not enough resources for us all to drive SUVs. Oil and road space are both limited. On top of that most of us don't like pollution either.
This may mean that in the future you will have to think about getting a more efficient vehicle. It also helps to use mass transport, e.g. get firewood from a local shop or delivered if possible. We really need public transport to improve a lot in many places too. Believe me when it works well it is actually easier, cheaper and more convenient than trying to take a car into a city and park it.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Thats just facetious, if people have a genuine need for a 4x4 or some other large power hungry vehicle so be it, but mom taking junior to school or doing your daily commute to work does not require a V8.
Laptop Reviews
that car will never see the streets in the U.s> the oil companies have a death grip on the gov't
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=1230&bih=840&q=convert+313+miles+per+uk+gallon+to+miles+per+us+gallon&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=
Yea, I've always wanted my cake and eat it too!
You're absolutely right. Even better than minivans seem to be full-sized family vans.
However, I live in Alberta (Calgary) and drive a small car (Prius), but I don't really go outside the city or through the mountains in winter. That being said, we get Chinooks, not like living in Edmonton or more North, where they get real weather.
Usually my area doesn't really have a lot of snow or precipitation, but two weekends ago, there was some interesting weather if you were going skiing, didn't really matter what you were driving (bus, semi, truck, SUV, car, coach, all in the ditch) - can't drive through an avalanche.
Interesting.
Probably because the Toyota Townace, if I'm not mistaken, is a rear wheel drive vehicle. In North America, minivans are typically front wheel drive (though there are exceptions). With the weight over the drive wheels they tend to do decently in the snow.