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.
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 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
the light weight is actually kind of worrisome too. Around here crosswinds are nasty for the current crop of small cars when running on the highway, this thing barely weighs as much as my motorcycle and has a much larger cross section. I could see it being kind of scary to drive on the highway unless its got some serious aerodynamic down force.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
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.
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
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.
Diesel-electric drives are not hybrids any way you want to look at it. There is only one type of motor directly attached to the propulsion unit. There is only one type of motor generating power. It's an electric drive with a generator, or a diesel drive with a fancy transmission, but not a hybrid.
Either way, I doubt this car has such a setup. The article mentioned a 7-speed gearbox. The only reason you would do that is if you were connecting the engine directly to the drive train and wanted to ensure efficient operation. If it were straight electric, the engine could be run at optimum conditions at all times, and the electric motor would have at most a 2-speed gearbox.
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
FWIW, the two stated mileages in the summry are effectively the same, but they are stating it in two units of measure. The 313MPG figure is miles per imperial gallon, which is 261MPG by US units. That being said, I have no idea how to get that to 235MPG unless Qatar has invented their own mile or gallon.
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.
It makes some comparisons a little easier. The distance you want to go is, in a sense, constant, while the amount of gas you use (aka the money you have to spend) is the variable. Some Duke researchers even got a journal paper out of it:
http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2008/06/gpmfuqua.html
(That's a popular account; the original article is in Science, behind a paywall.)
The key comparison: going from 18 mpg to 28 mpg saves 198 gallons of gas over 10k miles, but going from 34 to 54 mpg (again, 14 mpg) saves only half as much (94 gallons).
Slashdotters are used to doing the math in their heads and probably don't much care, but for the less math-aware, having the constant of the distance they want to go in the denominator makes the math more intuitive.
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
Just like the "1 Liter" car or the "3 Liter" Lupo, you won't be able to buy it outside Germany. Which is sad. Best you could find in the United States is the 70mpg Honda insight, but it was discontinued due to lack of interest. :-(
All I need is a commuter car. That's it, and any these high MPG units from Volkswagen would be more than adequate. I don't require a Ford Living Room SUV.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
"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.
99 mile An Hour is too slow??
That's near enough to 160 K/hr!
I think it would be safe to say that in most parts of the world that speed is going to get you walking home after the authorities take your licence.
NZ Electronics Enthusiasts: Check out my Trade Me Listings
Oh no not ugly, because of course the first function of a car is to look cool.
Grow up.
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
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.
Carbon fiber raw materials are super cheap. That is why all the car companies are trying to find ways to automate layup.
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.
Compared to say Gasoline?
That stuff is really dangerous.
While I'll believe it when I see it on dealer lots, there's reports that 100 will be made, and some may make it to the US and China.
Or, just wait another 13 years, and there'll be Lupo 3Ls that are old enough to import legally as classic cars.
Or, move to Canada and wait 3 years, and those same Lupos will be old enough.
The thing is, because it's a hybrid, the electric motor can give you a boost. 0-100 km/h (so 0-62 MPH) is 11.9 seconds. That's faster than a 10 year old Golf/Jetta/New Beetle TDI with a slushbox.
And, as for that Focus, it takes a different mindset to drive slow modern cars properly and safely. It's all about the momentum. (Oh, and not buying a slushbox. That helps, too.)
Slow old cars, OTOH, those are dangerous. I had an 85 Jetta and 86 Golf diesel... a slow Buick in front of me on a short ramp meant I had to either pass them where there was no room to pass them, or play chicken with a semi.
If you buy your doughnuts by the trailer its not wonder you weight 600lbs!
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
With a stick shift that focus would not suck so bad.
Power is not the problem, the old VW Beetle and the earliest Honda cars are like that. Problem is the crash test safety requirements -- would it meet those?
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
Good point. It probably would be safe in a collision I'd imagine, it's not like VW to not think of that. Weight isn't the biggest issue in a crash, how the energy is absorbed is. My Miata only weighs about 2000 lbs and it has a 4 star safety rating. It's so light that if I leave it in neutral I can easily push and pull the car back and forth with one hand.
I'd just hate to have to merge onto a 70 mph highway with only 39 hp. The Miata has about 140 hp and I usually floor it to get on the highway. Even flat out it takes over 7 seconds just to get to 60 mph (though it's so low it feels like you are going much faster, it's a fun car). What would the 0-60 be with 39hp and 1000 lbs less to move? Is this VW a two seater or a four seater? Two extra passengers would add 300-500 lbs.
Cool art gallery, if you're into that sort of thing.
Fast acceleration is very useful, particularly for overtaking on single-carriageway roads, but it's not a massive factor in highway safety.
how about when the idiot in front of you goes too slow on the entrance ramp on the freeway instead of speeding up to freeway traffic speeds and you are stuck entering the freeway too slowly. i bet acceleration is important then.
Answer: quit tailgating! Leave space at the beginning of the ramp, then you can accelerate to freeway speeds as you catch up.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Life is WAY too short to compromise and live dully...
That attitude is how we got a bunch of stupid asshats driving SUVs instead of minivans. Your right to fun ends when it impacts my way of life. We need efficient cars, and damn anything else. Really we need to get rid of cars, but efficient ones would be a good step in the right direction.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"