StreetScooter: The $7000 Open-Source Modular Electric Vehicle

bill_mcgonigle writes "A consortium of eighty companies and developers have developed the StreetScooter, a modular electric vehicle developed in a year using open-source methodologies. With a top speed of 74mph and an 80-mile range, the vehicle is expected to cost $7000 and be available in Germany in 2013."

Comments

import timeline

[ThorGod]

We'll see it in the US in 2018 for $17k.

I want one...

Re:import timeline

[Lumpy]

Look at the smartcar, in Europe it sold NEW for the base model for $5500-6500US when it hit here it sold for $17,500 for the base model and it's gas mileage dropped drastically because they had to add "safety features" that are useless.

The Smart car has stellar safety ratings all over europe, yet it was deemed "unsafe" in the USA and needed to be retrofitted with US safety equipment. Now it has to have the big engine in it ot move it, and Oh you cant have the Diesel engine that get's 80mpg.
  Hopefully someone will circumvent the retarded US auto laws and sell it as a "kit" so it does not have to meet ANY US safety or other laws and can be a home made car that fits under the "experimental" rules like they do iwth aircraft.

Re:import timeline

[JoeMerchant]

$7K, 80 mile range, 74mph, 2 passengers, I'll grey market import it if it's really that good and cheap.

Re:import timeline

[rubycodez]

useless in who's opinion? Maybe you're not an engineer and your opinion means nothing. The car was found to have inadequate chest protection for passenger in front-end impact and inadequate leg protection for driver. A steel cage was added to rectify these deficiencies. In the USA a mismatch between vehicle kinetic energy in a crash is much more likely than Europe, hence higher standards for the very light cars.

Re:import timeline

[westlake]

Hopefully someone will circumvent the retarded US auto laws and sell it as a "kit" so it does not have to meet ANY US safety or other laws and can be a home made car that fits under the "experimental" rules like they do iwth aircraft.

It doesn't work that way:

Homebuilt land vehicles (cars, motorcycles, ATVs), whether built from a kit or entirely from scratch, are regulated on a state level and must therefore comply with the regulations of the particular state in which they are licensed. Homebuilt vehicles are not regulated on a federal level - at least not formally. Normally, the state-level regulations that apply to such vehicles are less stringent than the federal regulations that apply to manufactured products, but much depends on the state in which you live. For example, the motor vehicle code of many states contains language requiring that all motor vehicles are equipped according to the federal regulations in effect when the vehicle was manufactured. Homebuilt aircraft and watercraft must comply with federal regulations.

Liability insurance should be relatively easy to obtain, and priced about on par with existing coverage. Collision and comprehensive insurance may be more costly and difficult to obtain. The difficulty with comprehensive and collision insurance comes mainly from the inherent difficulty of establishing a value for your car. Consequently, you may be asked to have it professionally appraised, in which case the total coverage will then be limited to the appraised value.

If you do not already have insurance on an existing car, it will be very difficult to find a company that will write a new policy on your homebuilt car.

Licensing And Insuring Homebuilt Vehicles [Rev. May 31st]

I live in a lake effect snow belt in upstate New York. The motor vehicle safety laws don't look half so retarded where the weather can turn lethal in a heartbeat.

Re:import timeline

[BitZtream]

Hopefully someone will circumvent the retarded US auto laws and sell it as a "kit" so it does not have to meet ANY US safety

Go fuck yourself. Seriously, Go fuck yourself. A kit car still has to be safe thank god, otherwise we'd have morons like you driving around shit that flies apart going down the road and ends up not killing your retarded ass, but something ends up coming through my windshield and killing me.

Ignorant idiots like you do not need to be assembling anything thats going to go 70 mph on a road that I have to travel on.

You like European safetly laws so much, take your ass over there, I'd prefer to keep idiots like you from putting my life at risk as much as possible. Its bad enough that people have to drive down the road with someone like you.

Please note: Experimental aircraft are HIGHLY restricted, just because they let the owner do stupid shit doesn't mean they let them do stupid shit near others or with others involved. Get a clue moron.

Re:import timeline

[slart42]

Look at the smartcar, in Europe it sold NEW for the base model for $5500-6500US when it hit here it sold for $17,500 for the base model and it's gas mileage dropped drastically because they had to add "safety features" that are useless.

Uhm. I'd be very surprised if you can get a new smart car in Europe for $5500-6500US. I just checked the web site, the list price in germany is 10190 EUR for the base model (= USD 14043).

Re:import timeline

[cynyr]

Simply assumming that the other car will be big and heavy is the wrong way to go. can we just add a "shall not impart more than $X force over $Y time to other object(s) when striking object(s) with the leading edge of the vehicle while going forward at $Z mph" to the requirements. Make the big cars have to take on some of the work of protecting those in smaller cars and not simply "ohh look my passengers are safe so i win" sort of a thing they have going now?

Granted there should be some minimum car weight/strength that the above standard applies to. so your lotus Elise convertible may not really be in the right category and may need to take on some addition work to ensure that it is safe enough.

I do agree though, there is a larger weight/speed thing here in the states, we have have a lot of 55MPH 2 lane roads with only a stripe protecting people from a 110MPH closing speed offset head-on crashes. maybe the issue is our road system..

Re:import timeline

[cynyr]

Right, but take a look at the required roof crush strength? now if I recall correctly this is a scant 2-3 times the cars empty curb weight. I'd bet that if you fall off the road the car doesn't do so well if you end up upside down... Here is an example of what a rally car can take and have the drivers get out of the car uninjured (minor scrapes don't count). Granted the car is a total write off, but he's not dead. There is no reason that these sorts of things couldn't be incorporated into modern road cars. here is another example, granted he does break his femur, but hitting a tree at around 100MPH in a road car with the drivers door will likely kill you.

Anyways some food for thought, on how useful those laws really are.

Re:import timeline

[Anaerin]

I do agree though, there is a larger weight/speed thing here in the states, we have have a lot of 55MPH 2 lane roads with only a stripe protecting people from a 110MPH closing speed offset head-on crashes. maybe the issue is our road system..

And in Europe (Well, the UK at least) there are a lot of 70MPH 2-lane roads with only a paint stripe protecting people from 140MPH closing speed crashes. The Euro-spec Smart car does fantastically well at surviving a head-on crash, as ably demonstrated here. And bear in mind (as Mythbusters showed) with 2 vehicles colliding at 70MPH, the effective speed is 70MPH, not 140.

US regulations have all kinds of stupid limitations, like having the headlights being fixed a certain distance from the road (Not allowing for adjustable height vehicles), very poorly designed lighting systems (made to dazzle oncoming drivers rather than illuminate the road), excessive large bumpers and so on. The smart was already one of the safest cars on the roads, scoring better in crash and safety tests than most other vehicles available in any class. The additions and alterations that were forced on Daimler by US regulations didn't help, merely hindered it's safety and the efficiency of the vehicle.

Re:import timeline

[Taty'sEyes]

I own a "kit" aircraft that I built. I can assure you that no one let's the owner do "stupid shit". I had inspectors verifying my work monthly. I had to document the entire process and rebuild parts I fucked up or that they felt hesitant about. My plane is true in every sense of the word. The end result is a better than factory aircraft that exceeds all safety regulations. Did I mention it is fully aerobatic as well and its main spar is capable of withstanding +/- 7 G's? I also spent 7 years of my life building the plane. I doubt anyone will want to spend that much time on a $7k car kit.

Re:import timeline

[bennomatic]

I'm not so sure that kinetic mismatch statement is true anymore. Last time I was in Europe--five years ago--everywhere I went I saw large numbers of SUVs. This includes Germany, Italy and London. Maybe not to the same level as in the states, but definitely more than I'd seen five years before that. Even if the trend has slowed down, I'm guessing there's plenty of opportunity for kinetic mismatch.

Re:import timeline

[Anonymous Coward]

All these "impediments" were added as protectionism for the failed US auto industry. Every one of them.

Re:import timeline

[itzdandy]

I agree with your premise, but I think that you are overlooking 1 vital safety concern. The average vehicle in the US is much larger than the average vehicle in Europe. So a very safe car in Europe is not necessarily a very safe car in the US.

Remember, every other American has a gigantic SUV, Hummer, Excursion, Expedition, Suburban, Tank, etc.

Smart vs Hummer = very very bad.

Re:import timeline

[Anonymous Coward]

I would love to, it seems there are far less retarded tea party assholes like you over there. Problem is as a product of the american education system I am far too under-educated to emigrate to most European countries. americans are thought to be very stupid and assholish by many people outside the USA.. Like you yourself prove to everyone on a public forum.

just because you are a retard that cant assemble anything with it flying apart, does not mean everyone else is as incompetent as you are.

Please dont judge others compared to how horribly inadequate you are. Maybe if you had any skill at all you would understand that.

Re:import timeline

[ormondotvos]

You hit a tree at 100 mph you deserve to be dead. You want thrills, learn to kiteboard.

Re:import timeline

[bhtooefr]

The safety regulations aren't the problem with the Fortwo, actually. The US W451 Fortwo isn't appreciably heavier than the European W451, and there were some W450s that were legally certified to come into the US, although at extensive cost increase due to the economies of scale of the modifications (as I understand, they were minor modifications, and more nitpicking than anything - had the W450 been designed for the US from the outset, it wouldn't have been any more expensive). All W451s are heavier than the W450, but it's also a somewhat bigger car for other reasons than safety.

The problems are threefold: emissions, the NEDC being very optimistic (and EPA being slightly pessimistic on gasoline and rather pessimistic on diesel engines), and the Fortwo concept AND implementation in general sucking for what it's being used for.

US emissions standards make it very, very difficult to use a truly efficient engine, because high efficiency engines (diesels, lean-burn gassers) tend to spew nitrogen oxides. Difficult doesn't mean impossible, but it DOES mean expensive.

So, what's wrong with the Fortwo concept? It's designed for ONE thing, and one thing only: being extremely short wheelbase, so two can be parked in a single parallel parking space. That's IT. And, that works great in heavily populated cities, like what's common in Europe. However, it's a side-by-side layout out of necessity, which tends to increase weight. It's also tall to maximize occupant comfort with the short wheelbase - you can use height instead of length to get additional legroom - but that increases frontal area. And, the shape of a very short wheelbase car like the Fortwo provides very little room for streamlining, so drag coefficient is rather high.

As for the implementation, the transmission is awful, the ride quality is dreadful (although a lot of this is due to the short wheelbase), it has parts commonality with just about nothing (meaning you're stuck buying things from the dealer a lot of the time, and it's a Mercedes), servicing can be a nightmare due to the engine placement, and what little they could've done to improve aerodynamics, they didn't do.

THAT is why the Fortwo sucks. Nothing to do with US safety regulations.

(Oh, and the reason for DOT lighting regulations sucking the way they do? The DOT regs were designed to illuminate a 1950s-era unlit, non-reflective overhead street sign.)

Re:import timeline

[nobodie]

no, the issue is the moronic American cars. I moved back here last summer after 15 years in Asia, and the first thing that shocked my whole family was the absolute insane size of the cars. In Asia we had a few H2s, but they were like tanks on the roads and people who owned them could only fit on big roads, lots of city streets couldn't fit them. People traveled at the same speeds there as here (although I would get a speeding ticket for my landlord every 6 months or so-- speeding cameras set up everywhere, the picture of your car is printed on the ticket) and I am not convinced that there was any greater mortality, they just have smaller cars.

So, i wonder if this is a function of the insurance industry. Insurance companies decreasing your rates for monster sized cars to protect you at the expense of others, which forces a retaliation by the others and now we have these giganto cars. When we bought a car here in August, we got something that seemed huge to us, but as we drive around it is small compared to these elephant cars.

Hopeless situation? no wonder we consume such an insane amount of the world's energy...

Re:import timeline

[mattack2]

Though according to Wikipedia, the first Smarts came out in 1998. I still doubt it was that cheap then, but it was probably cheaper than it is now.

Re:import timeline

[cynyr]

Also, There seems to be no to little regulation of aftermarket bumper height. This coming from driving a saturn S series for the last 10+ years. It is rather scarry to see lifted trucks with leading front edges above the top edge of my doors (aka the bottom edge of my windows). I can't help but think that my car just isn't built for getting hit by a 3500 Lb truck with 1000 Lb of shit in the box across the drivers windows and would likely end with me being dead. As far as i'm concerned doing that to a car/truck and then driving it on the road might as well be attempted manslaughter and if you do hit and kill someone it should carry a far worse penalty than a normal accident. /soapbox

Re:import timeline

[bhtooefr]

FWIW, those brodozers are more like 6000-7000 pounds.

In any case, some states do have bumper height regulations, but they're rarely enforced.

Re:import timeline

[cynyr]

And in some states there aren't many regulations (wheels, seatbelts, and indicator lights, headlights if you want to drive at night) if you have an ORV (Off road Vehicle) sticker in the window...

Well

[Mashiki]

That seems kinda pricy to me. Especially looking to Europe for 2013, and the current state of their fiscals and the general shakiness all around. If it was oh $1500, maybe it would be viable. $2000 would be tolerable, but $7k? Not a chance unless you're looking for a status symbol.

Re:Well

[MimeticLie]

You do realize that despite the name, it's a car rather than a scooter, right? $7k is quite good; the closest competitor that comes to mind would be a Smart Car, and those start at $12k in the US.

Re:Well

[Mashiki]

Yes, I do. And it's still about triple what the market will be able to bare in 2013.

Re:Well

[Anonymous Coward]

A 7k car is too expensive? You're a moron.

Re:Well

[shitzu]

You are saying that 7k car does not take off in bad economy. Well, bad economy is a good place to sell cheap cars as opposed to expensive ones. Tere might be potential. And besides - while the US consumer is still hot on hybrids that consume more petrol than an average 10 year old diesel hatchback here, electric vehicles are all the rage in EU.

Re:Well

[Anonymous Coward]

You're a moron.

Most insightful comment so far, sadly.

Re:Well

[hairyfish]

The cheapest car you can buy in Australia is $15k ($US and $AU is about 1:1 presently), the cheapest hybrid is $30k. Not sure what 'market' you're talking about, but this will be the cheapest product on the market, by a fair margin. If it works as advertised it will have no problems selling.

Re:Well

[Anonymous Coward]

Depends, in Germany the definition of the vehicle(and thus the license you need to operate it) is largely dependent on the power of the motor, not the shape of the vehicle. There are other vehicles that resemble cars but are technically considered scooters, and can thus be operated with a scooter license.

Re:Well

[Zorpheus]

Lol you shouldn't take these panik-spreading journalists so serious.

Re:Well

[Hognoxious]

Well, bad economy is a good place to sell cheap cars as opposed to expensive ones.

A bad economy is a bad place to sell anything.

The Greeks will probably be on their 962nd bailout before it's in production.

Re:Well

[KDR_11k]

I don't think the Smart car is meant as a low cost option at all. For a low cost car you'd buy some eastern European or non-Japanese-Asian brand. The Smart is more of a way to get attention (and more parking gaps). The thing's a Mercedes after all.

Re:Well

[shitzu]

We are not talking about Greece. We are talking about Germany, where a $7k car is ultra-cheap compared to what people normally buy ($30-100k). European Economy is quite diversified, nothing like US states.

Re:Well

[rubycodez]

You mean for people without a tech job? Most of us here have them, we can afford a vehicle for $7 or $15K. Hell, some of us (not me) blow that on electronics over a 3 year period.

Re:Well

[kdemetter]

And who do you think is paying for Greece ( Greek bailout ) ?
We keep pouring money into it, while knowing that it won't solve anything. And that money comes from the taxpayer.

The problem is not the economy itself , it's that our governments are giving our money away to fill a hole that can't be filled.
But that has an impact on the economy, because people who have less money left ( after taxes), buy less.

Re:Well

[RevGregory]

Yes, I do. And it's still about triple what the market will be able to bare in 2013.

Really? Is that due to the end of the world as predicted by the Mayan calender or some other supernatural event? And what does it say about the $40,000 Chevy Volt? Although, I will agree that the Volt is easily priced at twice what the market would bear (not bare) to actually make it a consumer item (were it not for .gov agencies being forced to buy these things it would make the Edsel look like a genius move.) In reality, if you could get the same tax break individuals get for buying the craptastic $40,000 Chevy Volt you'd actually MAKE $500 for buying a StreetScooter. Thanks to the "Cash for Clunkers" debacle 10-year old used vehicles are now running around $5k-$6k making $7k for a NEW vehicle pretty attractive. Even if after bringing it up to US standards the price is in the $10k-$12k region, it still looks like a winner in a market where it's only competition would be the "Smart Car" which gets worse mileage than my brother's 15-year old Honda he paid $3.5k for 5 years ago.

Re:Well

[Phoghat]

You do realize that despite the name, it's a car rather than a scooter, right? $7k is quite good

Hell I've got a Suzuki Burgmann scooter that costs more than $7K that I just use for getting around town and for short out of town trips. When it's raining I don't use it, a $7K car I could use.

Re:Well

[Hognoxious]

And who do you think is paying for Greece ( Greek bailout ) ?

It's not going to be Italy, Portugal or Ireland is it? If money was brains they'd be on a par with shitzu (931108).

StreetScooter

[NFN_NLN]

"StreetScooter", great name for a product... that isn't a scooter.
Plus, there is no way a search for StreetScooter could return ambiguous results.

http://vimeo.com/28929146

Re:StreetScooter

[Anonymous Coward]

I always thought "Marketing" was to "Business", as "Phys. Ed Teachers" are to "Educators".
But alas, if there is no one manning that station you end up with a car branded a "Scooter".

Re:StreetScooter

[Crudely_Indecent]

Oh, they'll come up with a suitably marketable name for the US. They'll go the "SmartCar" naming route, or they'll go the Psion "XD" naming route.

So it will be given either a stupid name, or a faux cool name.

Re:StreetScooter

[Dahamma]

It just goes to show you what open source methodologies get you so often... a well engineered product for a fraction of the price of competitors that has no clue how to market it to the customer so no one will ever use it. Sigh. I know everyone hates marketing and sales but they do in fact serve a purpose...

Re:StreetScooter

[El Torico]

I know everyone hates marketing and sales but they do in fact serve a purpose...

I agree. I ran a small business for a while and I noticed that people forget who you are and what you are selling in a few days at best. Sales and marketing are critical, but I think most people disparage them because of the stereotypes, which have a basis in reality, but are overblown.

Re:StreetScooter

[Dahamma]

In fact stereotypes are what marketing relies on, because most of the time they are in fact true! ;)

Re:StreetScooter

[EdgeCreeper]

The name of the company was on the road, so to speak: StreetScooter (road roller)

I know it is an artifact of Google Translate, but I like the name 'Road Roller'.

Re:StreetScooter

[JanneM]

The US market needs a deadly-sounding, weaponish name to play properly to the customers insecurities. "PredaViper 2000 Insurgent Rebel X ReLoaded" sounds about right.

For the Japanese market, look for your "Let's Go Mushroom Kawaii!" at your nearest dealer.

Re:StreetScooter

[Werkhaus]

The US market needs a deadly-sounding, weaponish name to play properly to the customers insecurities.

The Hammerhead Eagle i-Thrust?

Re:StreetScooter

[Arancaytar]

i-Thrust

Apple would go iMedieval on their ass.

Re:StreetScooter

[hey!]

"StreetScooter", great name for a product... that isn't a scooter.

The German word for scooter (according to Google Translate) is "Roller", so I'd guess the project name is in Germlish or Engeutch or whatever. Maybe it's like the mock Swedish names IKEA gives things that make your wife say, "Oh, honey, this Dyra skithög is just what we need to organize our string collection!"

Re:StreetScooter

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd buy that for a dollar.

Re:StreetScooter

[internettoughguy]

most people disparage them because of the stereotypes

So what you're saying is, sales and marketing need an image boost?

Re:StreetScooter

[Carnildo]

I know it is an artifact of Google Translate, but I like the name 'Road Roller'.

I don't.

not price-competitive

[societyofrobots]

I'm happy with my $3k gas scooter that does 70mpg in the city, 80 mile range, and up to 55mph. Oh, and it has no problems going uphill with a second rider =)

Oh, and it can be bought *today* without having to assemble it myself.

Re:not price-competitive

[Anonymous Coward]

You have a point, except this thing seats 3 and is a car.

Re:not price-competitive

[Crudely_Indecent]

I've spent some time browsing their site and I haven't found anything that indicates that it must be assembled. Just because it's "modular" doesn't mean it comes with a screwdriver and assembly guide.

I can buy a computer - fully assembled - which is still a modular system.

Re:not price-competitive

[epte]

Are you aware that the vehicle in TFA is more like a smart car than a scooter? This isn't a moped or a vespa we're talking about. See the picture here: http://streetscooter.eu/unternehmen-a-strategie/welches-fahrzeug-haben-wir-entwickelt.html

Re:not price-competitive

[Osgeld]

I would say that is a shitty marketing fail.

"A scooter is a motorcycle with step-through frame and a platform for the operator's feet."

Re:not price-competitive

[Lumpy]

I'm happier with my $3000 gas full size touring motorcycle that does 55mpg city if I'm keeping my hand out of the throttle and can go up to 140mph oh and it has no problem carrying a second rider + another 60 pounds of things in it's saddle bags and trunk as well as being highly comfortable for a 500 mile long ride.

I bought used and got 90X more bike than I would have bough new with the same money. I can now ride the interstates very comfortably and my bike is faster than any car on the road so I dont have to worry about being smushed by some idiot in a SUV that cant see a scooter, he cant miss my 8 foot long 950 pound bike.

Next time you upgrade, look at a full motorcycle. If you dont want a full cruiser, used honda dauvilles or (nt700v) are around that price range as well, carry a lot more , get you up in the air more, and can do 100-120mph so you can ride the autobahn or keep up with traffic around atlanta, or other major cities, oh and they last forever without major repairs.

Never buy new, always buy used. and dont be afraid of a larger bike. Honestly, think about trading up, it really opens up options. I added a taller windscreen so now at 75mph on the highway I am out of the wind so much that at highway speed only my legs get wet during rain. Dont buy a sportbike, those things are useless for daily driving. Plus I can outdistance any sportbike. after 350 miles without a stop I feel fine, I have yet to meet a sportbike rider that can do 1500 miles in 2 days. Comfort and utility is far more important than speed, I can carry 2 up + all camping gear for a 3 week trip on my bike.

Re:not price-competitive

[BitZtream]

Okay, so it can't go up a hill with 3 passengers either.

Re:not price-competitive

[BitZtream]

Yes, in English, thats entirely accurate.

Too bad they don't fucking speak English as a first language in Germany.

So while you call it shitty marketing fail, I call you stupid ignorant American making comments without bothering to be informed with the information right in front of your face. People like you are an embarrassment to our country, please keep your mouth shut in public.

Re:not price-competitive

[mattack2]

But shouldn't someone try extra hard to do a good job when translating to a new language, so to not make obvious mistakes like this?

(Yes, this to mind the probably apocryphal stories of movie titles/product slogans in other countries when translated back into English.)

Open Source methodologies?

[Anonymous Coward]

well, it does look like ass.

Re:Open Source methodologies?

[Anonymous Coward]

hahahaha this was so unexpectedly funny

If it's open source....

[epte]

... then where can I download the plans?

If the source is not open, then is the methodology "open source"?

Re:If it's open source....

[Anonymous Coward]

The methodology was open source in that every member of said community of developers were able to toss out ideas and do things instead of just "what do we need, we will do this and nothing else."

Each of the collaborators on the project was organized into a lead engineering group (LEG), made up of the foremost experts in each of the vehicle’s components, including the exterior, powertrain and electronics.

“Everyone is on par with each other. Everyone can bring in ideas to radically try whatever makes sense. The subject matter expert comes to the table and collaborates with the other LEGs,” said Kampker. “In case of a conflict that cannot be resolved, the issue is sent to the team of leaders in program management and it is resolved at that level.”

The method that participants took to build the StreetScooter echoes the car’s design. It’s a modular vehicle, with parts that can be added, removed and reused depending on customer preference. Even the batteries are leased separately so that fleets don’t have to deal with maintenance. Kampker says that relying on the strengths of individual manufacturers to create their own modules doesn’t just maximize customizability, but also allows the StreetScooter to be built quickly and inexpensively.

This car sounds like the wet dream of those folks that love to mix and match things to fit what they need. The word for it is on the tip of my tongue, but I'm not sure on it.

A wet dream for them, a potential nightmare for mechanics.

Re:If it's open source....

[Hognoxious]

The methodology was open source in that every member of said community of developers were able to toss out ideas and do things instead of just "what do we need, we will do this and nothing else."

So in fact it's fuck all to do with open source, because open source refers to source code, which is stuff that you compile on a computer.

Re:If it's open source....

[Anonymous Coward]

You know what's on the tip of my tongue? Pussy juice.

Re:If it's open source....

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop eating kittens/

Re:If it's open source....

[Anonymous Coward]

Language changes. It seems they're saying "open source" is a method of development that relies on allowing developers to not be confined to simple goals, instead being allowed relative free reign in what they want to make.

But yes, it seems like they had a part of their group brainstorming what would get them awesome advertising time and decided to call their rather liberal form of development "open source" despite it being neither open (anyone got the blueprints?) or source (code).

Damn you living language and wordsmiths who make things sound double good.

Re:If it's open source....

[Hognoxious]

The problem is that once mindless idiots start using phrases to mean pretty much anything, they end up meaning nothing.

"Language changes" isn't an excuse for talking colmych, so why don't you go and knerp your cogglebun?

Re:If it's open source....

[Lumpy]

Foremost experts are rarely experts.

The engineers of GM vehicles are outclassed HARD by garage tinkerers that love a vehicle. I know people that know more about the camaro than all the engineers at GM that designed it.

Re:If it's open source....

[Raenex]

Language changes.

In this case, marketing assholes try to co-opt what's good about a term and apply it to what they are doing instead of coming up with their own term that is accurate. In this case, the word "collaborative" or one of it's derivatives was used 5 times in the article. So they just could have just called it a "collaborative design".

Re:If it's open source....

[BitZtream]

They aren't saying 'open source', slashdot is.

They just said 'Open', which slashdot fucks up EVERY SINGLE TIME it comes up. Slashdot thinks everything has to fit in one tiny definition that suits their whim, so that more or less means if the word 'open' or the word 'free' is used anywhere in the description, it must be GPL!

Re:If it's open source....

[Anonymous Coward]

Knowing about something and actually applying that knowledge to make the thing are different things. The engineers at GM have designed a car that can be mass produced, with all the complexities that implies. I highly doubt your armchair expert can make a Camaro or even knows anything about actually making a modern car.

Re:If it's open source....

[DerekLyons]

This car sounds like the wet dream of those folks that love to mix and match things to fit what they need. The word for it is on the tip of my tongue, but I'm not sure on it.
 
A wet dream for them, a potential nightmare for mechanics.

I was thinking much the same thing.
 
The last thing I want is my car sitting dead in my driveway or at the mechanics while battery leasing agent points fingers at the computer vendor who's busy blaming the motor drivers which were written by company that got bought out last year and the motor firmware is now on end-of-life anyhow... I want car my to just work. I don't want to add another thing to my life that needs me to ride an endless upgrade and compatibility treadmill.

Pictures of the car

[thomas089]

Here are pictures of the car: http://www.streetscooter.eu/news-und-info/bildarchiv.html

Re:Pictures of the car

[Anonymous Coward]

mini cooper - retro?

Re:Pictures of the car

[Anonymous Coward]

Yay, another toaster... /sarcasm

Re:Pictures of the car

[citizenr]

Here are pictures of the car: http://www.streetscooter.eu/news-und-info/bildarchiv.html

RENDERS not pictures. Thery didnt make anything but some renders.

Re:Pictures of the car

[dredwerker]

Here are pictures of the car: http://www.streetscooter.eu/news-und-info/bildarchiv.html

RENDERS not pictures. Thery didnt make anything but some renders.

Surely renders not photographs. Both renders and photos are pics. Although your point is very valid.

Re:Pictures of the car

[Anonymous Coward]

...and frankly, the renders show very clear styling cues copied directly from other vehicles. I'll eat my hat if anything even remotely resembling this vehicle ever ships to the public, because they'd get sued into oblivion by a defensive auto industry almost immediately, as-is.

The PAIN boss! The PAIN!

[Anonymous Coward]

"Street Scooter" Consortium, please, translate your information to English again.
I'd recommend using someone else this time around doing the translation job.

There are words left out of your text. There are also sentence structure issues which make the site hard to read.

Good luck with the project though!

Re:The PAIN boss! The PAIN!

[jtownatpunk.net]

:facepalms:

Dude, it was autotranslated. That's why the title bar says Google Translate. And the link. And it has a header with settings for the translation.

Note to Nissan & Ford...

[FSWKU]

This car has range and performance similar to the Leaf and the upcoming Focus, yet will cost less than 1/5 what either of those overpriced toys go for, and also looks better. What's your excuse?


(Sidenote, if I can get a tax credit of up to $7500 from Uncle Sam for purchasing an EV, does that mean I actually MAKE $500 to drive this thing? They'll probably cite the "up to" part and give me a whopping $20 for this, but I can dream, can't I?)

Re:Note to Nissan & Ford...

[Spazmania]

You're comparing vaporware to a real shipping product. What's YOUR excuse?

Re:Note to Nissan & Ford...

[evilviper]

This car has range and performance similar to the Leaf and the upcoming Focus, yet will cost less than 1/5 what either of those overpriced toys go for, and also looks better. What's your excuse?

The Leaf seems to be reasonably priced. They're unable to meet demand as-is, and while they're turning a profit on the thing, it's not a cash cow by any means.

The $7,000 price-tag of this toy seems to really only be materials cost of drive-train+frame&interior. The batteries are meant to be "leased" rather than purchased, so they're probably damn expensive, and just being excluded from the price. The Leaf's battery costs about $18,000 alone (according to the WSJ), about half the cost of the whole vehicle. And that doesn't count actual production and R&D costs. I'm betting once more plants come online, and the supply of Leafs increases, you could lease one for pretty close to the same price as this toy. Plus the Leaf is a 4-door, with cargo room, and all the modern safety features, and certification by the NHTSA.

I wouldn't drive this tiny tin can of a death trap if they were giving it away... I'm not willing to risk driving on the California freeways without nice big crumple zones giving me a fighting chance... I'm sure it will have its use, but it certainly won't be competing with the Leaf for sales.

(Sidenote, if I can get a tax credit of up to $7500 from Uncle Sam for purchasing an EV, does that mean I actually MAKE $500 to drive this thing?

The US government isn't so idiotic as to hand out a fixed amount of cash for meeting some nebulous metric (ie. electric car). I don't know the specifics of the electric car tax credit, but I'm willing to bet it's a PERCENTAGE of the purchase price, which tops-out at 7500 (so they don't encourage purchasing an electric Hummer).

Re:Note to Nissan & Ford...

[iamhassi]

How is this Flamebait? He's right, this vehicle exists only on paper so far, and honestly a $7,000 electric car with 80 mile range seems so unbelievable in 2011 that I'll believe it when I see it. Not everything on the internet is real

Re:Note to Nissan & Ford...

[Anonymous Coward]

You're comparing vaporware to a real shipping product. What's YOUR excuse?

Spot on. Integration of all the parts into a car that functions as expected in 2011 is a difficult job. While I wish this project good luck, I don't expect the final car to be very good.

For just one example: most cars in this commuter class have low interior noise and a reasonably comfortable ride. This requires tuning the vibration modes of the body/chassis, powertrain, suspension, brakes, etc to different resonant frequencies so that one part doesn't start shaking other parts. The major car companies do add quite a bit of value, even when most of the sub-assemblies of their cars are built by suppliers.

Re:Note to Nissan & Ford...

[Lumpy]

"The Leaf seems to be reasonably priced."

are you insane? Leaf is NOT reasonably priced for a entry level subcompact economy car class. I can buy a BMW 325 for it's price.

Leaf needs to be $14,900 THEN it's reasonable priced.

Re:Note to Nissan & Ford...

[evilviper]

You've completely missed the context...

Re:Note to Nissan & Ford...

[DerekLyons]

This car has range and performance similar to the Leaf and the upcoming Focus, yet will cost less than 1/5 what either of those overpriced toys go for, and also looks better. What's your excuse?

The Leaf and the Focus exist in the real world, and have been tested and certified by the appropriate bodies as to safety, etc.... The Street Scooter is a pile of CAD drawings, Power Points, press releases, and imaginative artist's conceptions.
 
It's easy to be cheap and high performance when you're vaporware. Let's wait for hardware to hit the road when we can compare apples to apples before taking Nissan and Ford to task.
 
Also, the concept moves a substantial chunk of the cost (the batteries) 'off the books' by leasing them to the customer rather than selling them to the customer. While this creates an semi-illusory MSRP, it does however give a clearer picture of cost-to-own and cost-to-operate.

Re:Note to Nissan & Ford...

[BitZtream]

Once you couple in energy costs (financial costs at current market rates, not any environmental BS) , the Leaf is a great deal. The same energy amount from the socket is considerably cheaper than from gasoline. Gasoline is just FAR more compact than any electrical storage system we currently have.

Re:Note to Nissan & Ford...

[bill_mcgonigle]

How is this Flamebait? He's right, this vehicle exists only on paper so far, and honestly a $7,000 electric car with 80 mile range seems so unbelievable in 2011 that I'll believe it when I see it. Not everything on the internet is real

From the first link:

Just in time for the International Motor Show (IAA) in Frankfurt GmbH shows the Street Scooter with the vehicle "StreetScooter" the first prototype.

It's not mass-market yet, but a working prototype is real and not 'only on paper'.

Re:Note to Nissan & Ford...

[Anonymous Coward]

WRONG! The Leaf is only a value to people that cannot to math.

http://www.edmunds.com/nissan/leaf/2012/
Nissan Leaf MSRP $35,200

http://www.edmunds.com/nissan/sentra/2012/?sub=sedan
Nissan Sentra MSRP $16,060 24 miles/gallon city (Same chassis as the Leaf)

Lets assume that gasoline costs $5/gallon and that electricity is free. The price diff between these two cars is $19,140. How far can someone drive the sentry before they break even with the leaf.

19,140/5*24 = 91,872

You can drive the sentry for 91,872 miles before you break even assuming the worse gas mileage number a $5/gallon gas. Lets put an upper bound on this. Gas is more like $4/gallon and the highway milage is 31 miles/gallon.

19,140/4*31 = 118668

So even if electricity was free the leaf will be a better value than the Sentra. Because once you have driven far enough to break even you will need to have the batteries replaced in the leaf.

Re:Note to Nissan & Ford...

[Anonymous Coward]

If they're sold out at that price, then it's "reasonably priced" as far as the market is concerned.

Re:Note to Nissan & Ford...

[Spazmania]

I don't expect the final car to be very good.

I didn't say that. I'm very hopeful. And if it ever comes out and it costs anything close to $7000, I'll very likely buy one. But criticizing the Focus is as premature as criticizing Solaris in 1991 would have been. Sure Linux makes Solaris look silly now, but that's now...

Re:Note to Nissan & Ford...

[Spazmania]

The prototype wasn't built for $7000 and the team isn't taking orders with a promise to deliver at $7000. When (if) that changes it will then be time to compare it with the Focus, the Volt and the Leaf.

Don't get me wrong: I applaud their ambition and as long as it could handle 50 mile round trips and 60 mph speeds I'd would definitely buy a street-legal EV for $7000. But they're not there yet and it's neither a short path nor a sure thing from where they are today.

Re:Note to Nissan & Ford...

[bhtooefr]

The StreetScooter is probably light enough (sub 400 kg without batteries) and low enough power (sub 15 kW net, and for electrics, that's continuous, not intermittent) that it falls under Europe's heavy quadricycle laws.

Legally, a heavy quadricycle is treated as a four wheeled motorized tricycle, not a car - so safety regulations go out the window.

Also, the batteries aren't included in that $7000 price.

The Leaf and Focus EV are required to meet NHTSA regulations, which aren't too much more strict than EuroNCAP standards, but they're a hell of a lot more strict than what a heavy quadricycle has to meet.

Oh, and the tax credit info is right here: http://www.irs.gov/irb/2009-48_IRB/ar09.html

4 kWh minimum battery capacity, $2500 base credit, $417 for every kWh higher than 4. So, at 16 kWh, you have the $7500 credit. But, the StreetScooter concept, as it is now, may not qualify at all depending on how you interpret the wording, or it may only qualify based on the minimum battery capacity of one battery, as no battery is included. (But, interestingly, I'm not seeing anything on how big the batteries it uses are.)

Re:Note to Nissan & Ford...

[Lumpy]

"So even if electricity was free the leaf will be a better value than the Sentra. "

No even if Electricity was free the Leaf is a poor value compared to the Sentra. The Leaf will have to have it's batteries replaced at least once by the time you reach that mileage at the tune of $6800-8900US.

Also you forgot the Cost of installing the Leaf charging station at home another $5000US before you can even charge it. The eco pundits want people to ignore that small fact.

Finally, if you live somewhere other than california where it's 70 degrees all the time, the Leaf's battery will need far more frequent replacement. NYC,Chicago,Detroit latitudes expect battery replacement every 3 years. Texas and other south states might be worse as heat damages batteries more than cold. another small fact about electric cars that the eco pundits again hope most people ignore or do not bring up.

It's range is too small for the united states. I dare someone to drive it 50 miles in chicago or NYC without it running out of juice. It's priced as a rich persons toy and out of the reach of the populace where it would do some good. It's a failure from day one. Short range and $40,000 total cost to get it operational in your driveway. Fail-Fail.

Re:Note to Nissan & Ford...

[Lumpy]

The bugatti Veyron is also "reasonably priced" as they only make 4 a year and they are always "sold out"

That is the ridiculousness of that statement.

Re:Note to Nissan & Ford...

[Shotgun]

The US government isn't so idiotic as to hand out a fixed amount of cash for meeting some nebulous metric (ie. electric car). I don't know the specifics of the electric car tax credit, but I'm willing to bet it's a PERCENTAGE of the purchase price, which tops-out at 7500 (so they don't encourage purchasing an electric Hummer).

Really? They wouldn't be that stupid?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVmBBtLGg2s&feature=related

--facepalm--

Re:Note to Nissan & Ford...

[evilviper]

Didn't you actually listen to what they said? Dealers were lying about the purchase price, giving people a "discount", and the tax credits were tied to eg. KW/Hs and similar, which the vehicle in question happened to meet.

who fucking cares

[Osgeld]

you can buy a nice used car for less with better range.

Re:who fucking cares

[hairyfish]

Fucking awesome logic. There's no point in making new things when you can buy second hand things for cheaper? Have I got that right?

Re:who fucking cares

[Lumpy]

"you can buy a nice used car for less with better range."

I can buy a used BMW 750i for that price.
I can buy a 1962 Cessna single engine for that price.
In flint I can buy 2 houses for that price.
In Montana I can buy 150 acres for that price.
In mexico I can have 4 people killed for that price.
In California I can buy 2 loaves of bread and a gallon of milk for that price.

the cheaper

[infashion2011]

then you can view here, the cheaper http://www.enjoycheap.com/

msod up

[Anonymous Coward]

it racist for a go find something working on various people's faces is GNAA and support Talk to one of the to use the GNNA Failure, its corpse

How About a Gasoline-Powered Version...

[littlewink]

in the meantime. Maybe shave a couple thousand off the price too?

Some people do read German

[Anonymous Coward]

It would be nice to include the untranslated link as well

Re:Some people do read German

[BitZtream]

So you click on the translated link ... then the original link that shows up. Is it hard for you to click the link on the next page from Google translate?

"Mobility Services Provider"

[PolygamousRanchKid]

On their Website ( http://www.streetscooter.eu/ ) they mention "Mobilitätsdienstleistungen" (chew on THAT German word for breakfast!). They want to offer "car sharing" and "leasing" packages as well. Also, that the car is for short hops (SDV: Short Distance Vehicle), just like a Straßenroller (scooter), for the most common short trips. It was started by a couple of university professors, and grew into a consortium; some of the partners: http://www.streetscooter.eu/unternehmen-a-strategie/wer-sind-unsere-partner.html .

Have a look at the site, even if you don't speak German. The site is so full of English buzzwords, that you will be able to figure out what they are talking about.

Oh, and there is a cool Godzilla-esque picture of a giant kid stepping over Autobahn overpasses . . .

Re:"Mobility Services Provider"

[Anonymous Coward]

Have a look at the site, even if you don't speak German. The site is so full of English buzzwords, that you will be able to figure out what they are talking about.

Also, the "StreetScooter" link in the summary is a Google translation of the site =)

The Zeitgeist video is also in English, but be (spoiler) warned: large climax, just to see the same car.

Other open hardware cars

[Khalid]

The Rallyfighter : http://www.rallyfighter.com/ has already been in production

Riversimple Urban Car : http://www.40fires.org/ is an electric fuel cell based open hardware car

Re:Other open hardware cars

[Anonymous Coward]

The rally fighter isnt open hardware, it just another kit car.

Re:Other open hardware cars

[drinkypoo]

The rallyfighter is not open source and the riverside urban car doesn't exist and the website is not in full swing. So spot on, other than you're totally wrong.

Re:Other open hardware cars

[BitZtream]

You're entirely right, except for the entirety of your post.

The car in the article isn't open source either, and no where do they claim it to be. Slashdot claimed it to be 'open source'. It isn't. You can't go get the CAD drawings yourself and try to build this car.

OSS zealots have corrupted the word 'open' into this fantasy meaning that no one else in the world shares. slashdot see's 'open' it becomes 'open source' because neither the submitter or the editors have a rational grasp on the world, they too think everything revolves around GPL and open source.

The car was developed in an open consortium, which just means everyone in the consortium discussed everything freely with EACH OTHER. It doesnt' mean they are sharing it with the world.

Or just get an existing car and conversion kit ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or just get a 2CV and then the conversion kit for £4800
http://www.everything-ev.com/citroen-2cv-conversion-parts-kit-p-384.html

Summary - 2 seater electric car for short trips

[Cato]

Since the links in TFA were quite unhelpful: it's a small 2-seater electric car that's intended for short trips only. The $7000 gets you the car and there's an unspecified fee to lease the battery.

Overview: http://green.autoblog.com/2011/10/31/crowd-sourced-streetscooter-electric-vehicle/

Picture: http://www.flickr.com/photos/think_on_tour/4194887078/in/photostream

Re:Summary - 2 seater electric car for short trips

[Lumpy]

Ebay and some bits of wire will get me the battery without leasing it. there is a buttload of dell laptop batteries out there for cheap. There was one company selling remanufacturered Prius packs as well out there for quite cheap.

PatriotScooter

[The Creator]

How about calling it The de-financer of middle eastern dictatorships and creator of local jobs in the energy sector 9000?

not practical

[Anonymous Coward]

If it cannot drive up Mt. Evans, with 2 sumo wrestlers, and the air conditioner full blast, then it is not practical.

A 1500 USD car from 2011 in Germany :)

[jopsen]

My German isn't very good, but I did a quick search on a mobile.de for a car from 2011 going at about 1100 EURO (approx 1500 USD), and no kidding this is all you'll get for 1500 USD.
I know car prices are 3x that of Germany where I live (Denmark), but a new car at 1500 USD, I don't even think that's possible in Germany... (The cars around 1100 EURO looks a bit like this and it is from 1982 and has driven more that 300.000 km).

Practical

[Anonymous Coward]

If I worked from home, had my kids home schooled, and bought everything including groceries online, I would definitely get one.

Ebike

[Anonymous Coward]

Big deal. I just built my ebike for $1k. It tops out at 40 mph and can go 30 miles on a charge.

Looks good!

[Anonymous Coward]

At last an electric car that doesn't look like something Colani shat out. There have been some nice Kei-ecar design studies, but they never went into production. Hope this will.

Questionable functionality?

[lastx33]

I see that they plan it to have a range of 40Km. That's less than 25 miles on a charge so not much use for those living in rural areas or in the commuter belt of a lot of cities.The car would only be really useful to those living within a small distance of their commute or main travel distance. Does this not just take them away from existing efficient public transport and increase congestion? Assuming they want personal transport for further distances they would also need a more conventional car.

Re:Questionable functionality?

[rubycodez]

The average auto commute in the USA is 16 miles. Where I live I wouldn't use such a thing in January and February,would freeze butt off.

Re:Questionable functionality?

[BitZtream]

Thats 16 miles in each direction, not round trip.

Re:Questionable functionality?

[rubycodez]

Yes. so would employers let employees "top off the tank" for average or less commute. would parking garages provide it for addtitional fee? If we go to electric cars these questions need plans first

Not open source

[Anonymous Coward]

There's no source.

vs the lowly 150cc, $1200 motorcycle...

[Hadlock]

Seriously, in developing countries, BRIC countries in particular like Brazil, Russia, India, China - even Mexico on to our South - you can buy a motorcycle, which uses global commodities like steel and rubber, for $1200 delivered. It gets 80-100mpg and will do 60mph, can be repaired anywhere, by nearly anyone.
 
Don't get me wrong, electric technology is amazing, but when it comes to scooter/motorcycle technology, it's very difficult to make the argument for a $7000 scooter. 150cc motorcycle technology is about 100 years old and quite safe, simple, and for the most part -- green. Motorcycle engines are modular and easily repairable. I am repeating myself, but $7000 is approaching the price of a tiny sedan here in the states. Sure, there will be future versions that cost less, but perhaps we should be approaching electric passenger and commercial vehicles, not trying to reinvent the (two) wheel(ed vehicle).

Re:vs the lowly 150cc, $1200 motorcycle...

[ukemike]

You should RTFA. The name may translate from the german into "street scooter", but the vehicle is a car. Oh, and here is a link to a site with a picture, which has not yet been /.ed http://www.evworld.com/news.cfm?rssid=26745

Re:vs the lowly 150cc, $1200 motorcycle...

[Anonymous Coward]

The StreetScooter isn't actually a scooter, its a tiny car. You can already get real electric scooters for less than a grand in China and elsewhere.

Re:vs the lowly 150cc, $1200 motorcycle...

[Anonymous Coward]

You obviously didn't read the article. It is not a scooter, is a car named the StreetScooter.

Re:vs the lowly 150cc, $1200 motorcycle...

[Anonymous Coward]

From TFA: the ScreetScooter...is a car.

Re:vs the lowly 150cc, $1200 motorcycle...

[Rennt]

That's great and all, but the StreetScooter is a car ;)

Re:vs the lowly 150cc, $1200 motorcycle...

[Anonymous Coward]

sorry, you didn't read TFA. It is a car. the name is miss leading.

They've invented the golf cart

[BigSlowTarget]

Seriously. Ok, it's a fast golf cart with less range. Why does everyone get excited every time someone figures out you can put a motor to some wheels for less than $50k?

I guess you didn't RTFA.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a car, not a motorcycle.

Hire a decent designer

[gtada]

80 companies involved yet they couldn't hire a decent designer? Looks like one of those Chinese ripoffs. The aesthetics definitely matter if they want this to be a car people want to purchase and drive. The interior looks like it was modeled in an old version of Solidworks.

Many people assume that this is a motorcycle. I hope they change the silly name.

More info: Battery Leasing not included in $7k est

[BlueF]

http://www.rwth-aachen.de/go/id/bhsj/

$7k price "envisaged". Hmm.... is that translation or are they simply hoping and guessing rather than have an idea of the actual price... battery leasing not included??

"open source methodology" is not Free Hardware

[SD-Arcadia]

Sounds more like "shared source" design to me, a collaboration between 50 companies. Nothing seems to be open to the public.
Unlike for example the Global Village Construction Set. http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Global_Village_Construction_Set/
"Open Source - we freely publish our 3d designs, schematics, instructional videos, budgets, and product manuals on our open source wiki and we harness open collaboration with technical contributors."

Looks neat but get it for the right reasons.

[blindseer]

I like the idea of kit cars, sounds like a fun thing to do and as a way to potentially save money over buying a new car. The Streetscooter looks like a cute little car that can handle stop and go, tight spaces, and other obstacles one would find in a common city commute. This kit car is also a good way for someone to experiment in automotive technologies without having to reverse engineer an entire vehicle, or take on the much bigger task of designing a whole car of their own. There are vehicles out there that have a large market for aftermarket parts that people can build an entire vehicle from parts (the Jeep CJ comes to mind) but it looks like this Streetscooter is a more modern design that could appeal to more people.

What people should not be doing is getting one of these to reduce their "carbon footprint". Electric cars are coal fired cars. So long as a majority of our electricity comes from burning coal the electricity it runs on, and the energy used in the manufacture of the car's batteries, will create more carbon over the life of the car than if one just got a similarly sized gasoline or diesel fuel powered car. Real reductions in carbon footprint for vehicles involves nuclear power, natural gas, and perhaps some other technologies that have yet to mature.

This looks like a neat little car. If I had the space to put one together, and I thought I could get my 6'5" body inside, I'd consider getting one. I'd still keep my 4x4 truck for when the weather demands it, long drives, and when I need to haul more than groceries. Looks like something that would be easier to parallel park than my current vehicle, reduce the need to stop for fuel (just plug it in every night after work), and perhaps even save some money in the long run.

Re:Looks neat but get it for the right reasons.

[currently_awake]

1-Even if it produces more pollution than gas at least you/your kids don't breath it. 2-It's easier to put pollution scrubbers on a stationary plant. 3-Power plants don't idle, they either run at full or are turned off. 4-You can switch that coal to solar/tidal/wind/nuclear without needing a new car.

Re:Looks neat but get it for the right reasons.

[blindseer]

1-Even if it produces more pollution than gas at least you/your kids don't breath it. 2-It's easier to put pollution scrubbers on a stationary plant. 3-Power plants don't idle, they either run at full or are turned off.

1, 2, & 3- I'm talking about carbon output, not pollution.

4-You can switch that coal to solar/tidal/wind/nuclear without needing a new car.

Yes, yes you can. Problem is that until the electricity actually comes from solar/tidal/nuclear the electric car is creating more carbon in the atmosphere than the gasoline or diesel fuel powered car. If the goal is to reduce carbon output NOW, then one would not buy an electric car. They'd be better off with a natural gas car, public transportation, walking, biking, and so on.

Point is that by using an electric car while the primary source of electricity is from burning coal one is actually increasing their carbon footprint. Get the solar/tidal/nuclear electric production FIRST and then getting an electric car will reduce one's carbon footprint. Getting the electric car first means that one is going backwards.

Not sure about tthe "open source" part.

[Anonymous Coward]

For an to be "open source" you need free access to the plans when you buy the item. If you don't then is a close source item.

So the question is, when you buy the vehicle, do you get the design plans? If yes, then is really open source, if not then is just an alliance of companies that made a cheap vehicle.

No details?

[rbadgirl]

Didn't see any details on the web site - just a lot of marketing talk. It easy to built an 40 miles e-car for 7,000 bucks. Curtis controller, DC-Motor, a few golf cart batteries and a cheap glider. There you go. After having seen so may visions come and go: Is the streetscooter for real? m.

Clever marketing

[cvtan]

You develop a vehicle that can't go very far. Hmmm. Invent a new market segment, the Short Distance Vehicle (SDV). Now it's leading its market segment!! Not as clever as bottled water, but pretty good.

Re:Clever marketing

[mattack2]

80 mile range is close to the same as the mainstream electric vehicles out now.

Rubbish

[Anonymous Coward]

Electric cars are bullshit: too many resources needed to make them, run them, maintain them and recycle them. And the electricity for them is mostly coming from hydrocarbon fuel which we have to chuck about 65% away to make. It's all "ooohh, touch my fanny" bullshit. Mass transport or stay at home. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_of_the_50_Foot_Woman