After 6 Years, Aptera Motors Is No More

After years of beautiful concept cars, envy-inspiring demos, and missed production targets starting in 2008, high-efficiency car startup Aptera is liquidating its assets. A pointed excerpt from Wired's account: "The truth is, Aptera always faced long odds and has been in trouble for at least two years. The audience for a sperm-shaped, three-wheeled, electric two-seater was never anything but small. It didn’t help that production of the 2e — at one point promised for October 2009 — was continually delayed as Wilbur ordered redesigns to make it more appealing to the mainstream. Aptera had a small window in which to be a first mover in the affordable EV space, and that window closed the moment the Nissan Leaf and Chevrolet Volt hit the market. At that point, Aptera teetered on the brink of irrelevance." As a compulsive driver, I had been hoping to one day drive one of these to save gas money.

Comments

Who?

[hipp5]

Doesn't help that I'd never heard of them.

Re:Who?

[somersault]

I heard the name a few years ago. I just came here to point out that "an" is only to be used before words starting with a vowel, or at least a vowely sound :p You'd think an editor would have a better grasp of the English language.. :/

Re:Who?

[msauve]

You must be new here - it's timothy.

Re:Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

You'd think an editor would have a better grasp of the English language.. :/

Don't you mean "a editor"?

Re:Who?

[symbolset]

I had. Despite what the fine article says demand was not a problem. Lots of people wanted these cars. They just couldn't deliver them.

Re:Who?

[Archangel Michael]

Sounds like a scam to me. If you have a product, you deliver it. They didn't have a product, or at least didn't have the product they said they had., They were selling hype.

Re:Who?

[blackicye]

At least they achieved something...blowing through 40 million dollars in 6 years for a vaporware product is pretty impressive.

Re:Who?

[symbolset]

Like most startups they didn't have a product yet - just plans to make one. This is not at all unusual, and not necessarily a scam. A lot of companies come into being with the intent to make something great and then fail to deliver and run out of cash. Some few hit it big and the winnings are fabulous. Them's the breaks.

Re:Who?

[Rei]

You need to realize what happened with this company. Since I somehow inexplicably became the go-to gal for leaks, I would recommend what I've already written on the subject. The short of it: they *were* about to ship vehicles (I even have the vehicle integration schedule to back it up) when the board of directors forced a new CEO on them, a Detroit guy who ordered a redesign of almost everything in order to make it more mainstream.

Now that the company is dead, expect all of this and a lot more to start coming out of official circles.

Re:Who?

[Shotgun]

That's nothing. If they had some contacts in a Democratic administration, they could have blown through $500 million.

As Usual

[Mikkeles]

'was continually delayed as Wilbur ordered redesigns to make it more appealing to the mainstream.'

The perfect is the enemy of good enough.

Re:As Usual

[Anonymous Coward]

It's more than that ....

Any new car maker is going to have problems because they're trying to compete in an old business with entrenched companies.

Secondly, most folks don't give a shit about efficiency. Even after the crazy ups and downs of oil prices in the last few years, people are still buying gas guzzling vehicles. So, any auto company that's going to market their product based upon efficiency will have to wait a long time and have the capital to do it and most importantly, have backers that are willing to wait. People will not buy fuel efficient cars until gas prices are permanently high - we all have come to expect that prices will decline again.

Also, even when gas prices were comparatively high, SUV prices plummeted making them a good buy even with high fuel prices because the vehicles were selling so cheap. Or to put it this way, it was far cheaper to buy and operate a SUV than it was a Toyota Prius when gas prices were high - a lot of that was dealerships adding on a premium to the hybrids because they could.

Re:As Usual

[Colin Smith]

The good enough always wins because "the perfect" is a figment of deranged and twisted egos.
 

Re:As Usual

[gl4ss]

what they failed while doing that apparently was to do backroom deals of getting short term money in so they could have gotten the government loan. they should have backroomed deals to get money in that would have gone straight out after the loan was in back to the people who gave it. scummy, yes? but that's how they could have gotten it and that's pretty much how it goes with these gov. investment match deals in high risk stuff.

Re:As Usual

[Anonymous Coward]

Did they get any of my tax money. If so I need a pound of flesh.

Re:As Usual

[0123456]

An electric three-wheeler was never going to appeal to the mainstream, so it was a pointless exercise. If you're going to build electric cars you have to appeal to the rich hippy market.

Re:As Usual

[HornWumpus]

They failed to make sufficient political donations.

Re:As Usual

[sandytaru]

The thing is, I liked the design the way it was. It was cute. It was the Jetson's car without the flying.

Re:As Usual

[optimism]

So...how shall we explain that the ego-designed iPod, iPhone, and iPad won over the "good enough" alternatives?

Re:As Usual

[Anonymous Coward]

'was continually delayed as Wilbur ordered redesigns to make it more appealing to the mainstream.'

The perfect is the enemy of good enough.

This pretty much sums up how Steve Jobs approached design.

Re:As Usual

[Sporkinum]

That is pretty true. I gave my old 30 mpg Saturn to my mother in law, and bought a used 20 mpg Cadillac for $6000. Since I saved so much buying used, gas mileage was really not too important. I really enjoy the power and quality of the Caddy and I really would not want to go back to a lesser vehicle.

I would enjoy having better mileage, but it is not worth the premium in cost.

Re:As Usual

[Anonymous Coward]

What good 'enough alternatives'? If they were 'good enough' people would have bought them.

Re:As Usual

[0111 1110]

Because no one has ever made money by appealing to a niche market. Either you sell to the masses or not at all. Have I got that right? I would have bought one of these if he ever sold any and it wasn't too expensive.

Re:As Usual

[saleenS281]

All of the above were "good enough". Those products are FAR from being the perfect device. For instance: how about FLAC support?

Re:As Usual

[Kielistic]

Selling to a niche market essentially means it's going to be "too expensive".

Re:As Usual

[niw3]

"Real artists ship." Love him or hate him, he knew the very basics.

Re:As Usual

[Burning1]

If you're arguing that the iPhone is perfect, you've either never used one, or never used anything else.

Re:As Usual

[Rei]

Which is why obviously nobody ever sells cars to niche markets, right?

Re:As Usual

[Kielistic]

Essentially never to niche markets that do not want something "too expensive". I never said niche markets do not exist but by their very nature will be more expensive than mass market. The parent poster said they would have bought one "if it wasn't too expensive". I am saying that anyone who has to use the qualifier "not too expensive" will almost certainly not think that a niche car is affordable.

Re:As Usual

[Anonymous Coward]

You could get a car for the same amount of cash that would get much better mileage and a better power to weight ratio. Caddies are for old folks and minorities.

Re:As Usual

[Rei]

Which is why they're called "niche markets". Niche market buyers blow vastly more money on vehicles sold in quantities of thousands or tens of thousands of dollars than a merely $25k hyperefficient EV.

Re:As Usual

[Anonymous Coward]

Spoken like someone who lets others make their choices for them.

Re:As Usual

[optimism]

I do own an iPhone, and several iPods, and an iPad.

I have also used dozens of handheld computers, music players, and smartphones over the years. See my other posts on this thread regarding handhelds and mp3 players. As for smartphones, in the last 8 years I have used the leading models from Nokia, Treo, Samsung, LG, HTC, and Motorola...running Maemo, PalmOS/WebOS, and Android. No Blackberries, sorry, so I might have missed something there.

The iPhone has its share of problems, but based on my experience, it is the closest to perfect at meeting the current technical and market constraints.

There is no such thing as "perfect" in the real world, but there is such a thing as "maximally optimized for current real world constraints".

If you re-read it, my post was simply about the success of these ego-driven perfectionist products, over other products that are "good enough" for the mainstream. A very large counterexample to the GP's post.

This is just my opinion, based on more than 3 decades of using various small computing devices. If you have more experience, I'd love to hear about it.

Re:As Usual

[Burning1]

The iPhone is a 'good enough' product that does a pretty incredible job of meeting the desires of the market. It's arguably the Motorola Razr of the late '00s. The fact that it was envisioned by a man with a deranged and twisted-ego doesn't mean that it's necessarily a perfect product, and I doubt that Steve would have let the desire to build something 'perfect' get in the way of his ideals for the product, or approach to delivering it.

The iPhone is a good product, wrapped up in a great UI, and one of the best marketing campaigns I've ever seen. The suggestion that it's a perfect product probably comes from it mattching up against your desires and expectations of a device, rather than it's ultimate qualities. I'd argue that it's a great example of something that's 'good enough' in all the right ways, with an excellent focus on it's target demographic.

Re:As Usual

[Kielistic]

Yes... And that was exactly the point.. Niche products are more expensive. I am really not sure what you are even try to argue with. Some one that wants something "not too expensive" is not looking for a niche product because niche products are more expensive. No mention was ever made of people who do not mind spending more.

Re:As Usual

[Shotgun]

How did that screwy antennae issue work out for you?

Re:As Usual

[optimism]

Antenna? No issue whatsoever with my iphone 4. None of my friends and family had problems with their iphones, either.

Some folks have suggested that the "issue" raised after each iphone release, is in fact raised by Apple.

With the iphone 4, the "issue" was the antenna.

With the iphone 4s, the "issue" is battery life.

It sounds crazy on the surface, but when you think about it, problems with the antenna and battery on a product selling TENS OF MILLIONS of units would be even crazier.

Planting a fake "issue" allows Apple to tweak customer demand to better match their supply, during the first few weeks/months of a new release. And then - surprise! - the issue disappears entirely, never to be heard of again except from a handful of folks who read some article, but never bought the product, and never experienced the issue that they complain about.

Oh wait. You're that person? Sorry.

beautiful ?

[Anonymous Coward]

compare it to say an Aston Martin and it looks more like an student aircraft designers sketchbook drawing than a work of art from a car design pov,
3 wheels and a plastic body ? there is a reason 3 wheel cars have always failed in the marketplace, they look ridiculous and stability is fundamentally compromised

try making your concept cars look desirable, not like a handicapped car for able bodied people

Re:beautiful ?

[Cosgrach]

Actually, it was a very good looking vehicle. Face it, modern cars generally lack any sort of style and nothing differentiates them from the one another. The toyota looks like a honda looks like ford looks like chevy looks like volkswagon looks like bmw, etc... At one point subaru looked okay, but they have lost their imagination as well. Sure, if you can afford an Aston Martin, then okay. But all the really good looking designs are way more than 30 years old. Modern cars look like crap, and while they may be more reliable they are much more expensive to repair when something does go wrong.

Most older cars are built to LAST. Face it, they are designed to be disposable - when it breaks, throw it away and buy a new one. Yeah, what a way to save money. My Land Cruiser is 40 years old and is nearly 100% steel by weight. The transfer case and transmission housing are aluminum and there is a bit of plastic and foam in the dash panels and seats. That makes my older car a lot less expensive to recycle at the end of its useful life than *any* modern car.

  And do not underestimate the power of the Dark Side.... Err.. The Force... Errr. Composite body shells (with metal reinforcement). I digress. There are many (okay a few) cars out there with composite or 'plastic' bodies, with perhaps the best known being Corvette. It has had a fiberglass body throughout most of its production run. Saturn used plastic body panels until about '07 or so. The Smart car has used plastic panels through out it's production. Face it Buckwheat, as the need to reduce curb weight increases, composite and plastic body panels are going to be a big part of cars in the future.

Sure it may not have been designed for the general unwashed masses of people (who are mostly wastes of skin and can not drive and should not even have licenses).

It was way better than the Corbin Sparrow, with a longer range. And while it may have suffered *silghtly* in the stability area, it is no where near what you suggest. I have driven many three wheeled cars including the Aptera. If you put the single wheel in front (like the Zap), then yes, it will have problems. But that issue was largely solved in the Carver design, it was very stable. If you put the single wheel in the rear like the Aptera, the Epic Torque and a few others, stability is really mot much of problem at all. It's really more about how well balanced the weight is distributed and how low you can get the center of gravity.

I have also noted that while concept cars generally are nicely styled, by the time (if) they make it to market they look nothing like the original concept. The Aptera was a good looking car, certainly 'not built like a handicapped car' as you suggest. It actually was a little difficult to get in and out of if you were over 6' tall.

Re:beautiful ?

[dslbrian]

Overall terrible news IMO. I wish they wouldn't have focused on the electric aspect so much. Same body design, but with a normal internal combustion engine and a decent price, and I probably would have gotten one as a commuter vehicle (very similar concept to say a T-rex motorcycle, but without the high price). I think there is definitely a market for vehicles like this, lightweight like motorcycles, but enclosed (not always exposed to the environment like on a bike).

Re:beautiful ?

[Cosgrach]

Most older cars are built to LAST. Face it, they are designed to be disposable - when it breaks, throw it away and buy a new one.

Crumbs, I just noticed an error in this line. I MEANT to Say: Older cars are built to last. NEW cars are designed to be disposable. (Just like every other new consumer product. This really pisses me off!)

Re:beautiful ?

[Rei]

Amazing density of false claims.

Now, I can't call your views on aesthetics "false", mind you, but I can point out that the whole point of Aptera was that a particular persons idea of what a car "should" look like should not dictate what this vehicle looked like. They took vehicle design back to square one: "How can we carry two people and cargo using the absolute minimum of energy without compromising safety?" Everything flowed from that. If the most efficient vehicle shape to achieve that goal was a giant pig's nose, then the vehicle would have looked like a giant pig's nose.

The vehicle does not have a "plastic body". It has a "composite body". If you don't know the difference between the two, you really owe it yourself to at least look up what composites are. The strength in a composite comes from a fiber matrix ; the plastic resin that's injected is simply a bonding agent which defines the shape and transfers any forces into longitudinal stress on the individual fibers. Hence, stress on a composite is really tensile strength, which makes them very hard to damage. Ever seen pictures of one of those 100+mph wrecks of a composite supercar where the car is in pieces but the driver walks away unharmed? That's what composites do -- they either don't break at all or they shatter, but in the process they absorb tremendous amounts of energy compared to their mass. A nice side effect is that you can never get pinned into a composite vehicle; they don't irreversibly deform.

Three wheeled vehicles have not "always failed in the marketplace". If you want a present example, the Can-Am Spyder has been doing very well. Most of the difficulties of three-wheelers in the US are regulatory anyway. You can't have a three-wheeler that weighs more than (depending on the state) 1500-1800 lbs, to name one.

Stability is not in the least compromised.

It's a real pity.

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a feeling that if it was widely available, a lot of people would find themselves in one.

Hopefully a similar manufacturer will give us the next big thing.

parent is a goatse link

[Anonymous Coward]

posted by a chump with a mind smaller than his asshole

Dont't click the link

[jeti]

Don't click the link in the parent post. I think someone didn't like deep linking.

This.....is......

[Anonymous Coward]

SLASHDOT!

*kicks somersault into pit of doom for thinking slashdot editors are like real editors*

Re:Their car really were supposed to be beautiful.

[Bucc5062]

You are an idiot and a disgusting pig. Who ever reads this post Do Not Click on the link. Its a variation of goatse and way beyond NSFW). God I wish you could be banned for pulling crap like that.

Please mod this pig down to the basement.

Snow.

[arthurpaliden]

The major problem with these 'concept' cars, not just this one, is that they are only drivable in places that never have winter. Which of course rules out most of the industrialized western world.

Re:Snow.

[Anonymous Coward]

That's wrong. You can drive them everywhere, even in places with winter, as long as there's no snow at the moment.

Re:Snow.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the bigger problem is cost. If the price was low enough, you could use alternate transportation when there was snow on the ground. After all, I wouldn't claim motorcycles are useless, but they suffer from similar use restrictions, perhaps even greater restrictions from a practical standpoint. However a motorcycle generally costs less than a car would. A quick check on cycletrader in my area puts the cost for the majority of the kind of motorcycles I'd consider for commuting to work in the $7,000-$15,000 range. The Aptera 2-series was projected to cost $20,000 to $40,000 - I can't afford to spend as much as I would on a car and end up with a vehicle I can only use 1/2 the time.

Re:Snow.

[Anonymous Coward]

That's not true. I have driven an electric car at sub-zero (celsius) temperatures in Western Europe. You cannot charge them at sub-zero temperatures (at least not that particular car), but that simply means it will take a moment for the batteries to heat up a bit before you can charge them properly (and they heat up anyway while charging). If you have an indoor garage charging is not a problem. Furthermore, the electric car had much better traction on snowy roads than a regular car. And it was not a concept car.

Re:Snow.

[arthurpaliden]

I'm not talking about batteries in an electric car. I am talking about sexy concept cars with small wheels, low clearance and no weight trying to drive through a few inches of wet snow and ice.

Re:Snow.

[budgenator]

Technically the Aptera would have been classified as a motorcycle as its a reverse tricycle, no helmet is needed because of the enclosed cabin. I've seen several reverse tricycles without enclosed cabins, driven as motorcycles not as automobiles. You could drive one 9 months a year without blinking an eye, and in reality there are only a few days a year when you'd have to drive an old beater 4X4 if you did have one.
I'd love to have one, outrageous fuel mileage and an exotic look gives it major geek appeal, look at how much an Edsel is worth now.

Re:Snow.

[sunderland56]

Technically the Aptera would have been classified as a motorcycle as its a reverse tricycle

This depends on where you are. Each country is different, and each US state is different. This has been a problem in the past for three-wheeled vehicle designs; it means that (a) to drive it you must have the motorcycle endorsement on your driving license (which few people have), and (b) in some places you would still need to wear a helmet.

And as far as your Edsel comparison goes - yes, this is *just* like an Edsel. Hideously ugly with no redeeming engineering features.

Re:Snow.

[optimism]

The major problem with these 'concept' cars, not just this one, is that they are only drivable in places that never have winter. Which of course rules out most of the industrialized western world.

It's worth pointing out that Aptera's initial market was limited to California. They took preorders only from CA residents only.

And in fact, 95+% of CA residents do not get any ice or snow where they live.

That said, in the parts of the urbanized western world where we do get snow every year, we usually remove it from the road within a few hours. Snowplows with salt spreaders run around the clock when necessary, so folks can make their morning commute on time.

wrt winter conditions, this concept car looked just like a small sports car/roadster. You either put snow tires on it, and drive carefully when the conditions are awful, or you drive a heavier, higher, perhaps AWD, vehicle when conditions are awful.

Re:Snow.

[arthurpaliden]

That said, in the parts of the urbanized western world where we do get snow every year, we usually remove it from the road within a few hours.

And where is this magical place where the roads are cleared within a few hours

Re:Snow.

[ceoyoyo]

Aw, you live in one of those places where half an inch is considered a lot of snow and it usually doesn't last more than a couple of days before it melts, aren't you?

Re:Snow.

[Anonymous Coward]

The major problem with these concept cars is that they try to reinvent a product that has been fiercely refined during the course of a century.

Instead of taking the product of that evolution and address the last remaining flaws, they try to convice many billions of customers that what they want is actually something entirely different. Something that is less practical, more uncomfortable, more expensive and looks ridiculous.

I find it confusing that these people get their product off the ground at all.

Re:Snow.

[optimism]

And where is this magical place where the roads are cleared within a few hours

You have cowardly-ignored the most salient points of my reply:

1) The initial Aptera vehicles were marketed ONLY in California, where a small single-digit percent of residents have snow & ice; and

2) There is really no difference between one of these concept vehicles, and a lightweight sportscar, from the perspective of snow & ice driving.

I'll answer on your question anyway, and ask you to do the same.

Me, I grew up in rural New England, dairy farming country, about 2 hours outside of Boston.

During a heavy snowstorm, before and during the commute hours, the state roads were plowed and sanded roughly every hour. The town roads were plowed (and some sanded) every 1-6 hours, depending on the road, the level of snowfall, and the timing relative to commute hours.

We knew our plow driver by name. As a kid, I loved hearing the sound of the plow in the wee hours, because the schools were super-cautious about running buses during a storm, even if the roads were considered "safe" for car drivers. A 4:00AM snowplow often meant a school delay, or even cancellation.

That was in a rural area. My experience in various urban areas of the northern US (Boston, Rochester, Pittsburgh, Columbus, Madison, etc) is that they are cleared even more efficiently.

Yeah, you may hear about it in the news when an unexpected blizzard hits DC or NY, which both have horribly disfunctional public-works operations within their tiny city limits.

But if you get into the country, or farther north, the road crews are very efficient at clearing a blizzard. Think about it. When is the last time you heard of a blizzard shutting down a city in Canada?

Your turn now.

Where is the "magical" place that you live or have lived, in the urbanized western world, where snow is NOT cleared within a matter of hours?

Re:Snow.

[optimism]

Nope.

Lived most of my life in rural New England, where a 1-foot snowstorm was common, a 2-foot storm was not unusual, and a 3-foot storm happened every few years.

During a big storm, the plows ran pretty much around the clock to keep the roads clear. They would taper off somewhat at night. But I can only remember two big ice-storms where folks were "snowed in", and that was mostly because the ice snapped so many power lines.

How about you?

Re:Snow.

[Anonymous Coward]

In southern England. Even a few inches of snow causes total chaos.

Re:Snow.

[optimism]

And that happens what, once every three years? Boo hoo for you.

Stay home for a day until your rickety public works apparatus figures out what to do, or until the snow simply melts.

The average English "car" is much more similar to this lightweight Aptera thingy, than it is to the average American vehicle. So frankly, you would see the least difference if a concept car like this went global.

But again, this super-efficient car was not being sold to a global market. They took preorders in California ONLY.

It quite simply does not snow in San Francisco, Los Angeles, or San Diego. In Sacramento, every five years or so, they get a dusting. But nothing that would seriously impact traffic.

Aptera did not fail because their design was wrong. They went bust because the suits who replaced the founders totally failed to execute with those designs. Another mockery to the title "executive".

Re:Snow.

[countertrolling]

The major problem with these 'concept' cars, not just this one, is that they are only drivable in places that never have winter.

Mod 'Informative'

Re:Snow.

[ceoyoyo]

Northern Alberta. About 56 degrees north. Our halloween costumes had to be able to take -40. They'd plow the streets, the big ones pretty quickly, the little ones not so much. Salt isn't really cost effective when it's that cold, so you can't melt the snow. If you want it to go somewhere, you have to move it.

Of course, most of my friends lived down country roads the residents were responsible for plowing themselves.

Re:Snow.

[Rei]

The first Typ-1 had a tremendous clearance. When they switched it to FWD from rear-wheel drive, clearance dropped in order to account for the driveshaft to the front wheels instead of the belt drive in the rear; however, it still had about the clearance of a Prius. The wheels were stock. The early Typ-1s used the Potenzas from the 1st-gen Insight, for example.

Re:Snow.

[Rei]

Right. Because there's only one mode of transportation in the world -- the optimum, the car -- and nothing else, right? There's no such thing as, say, a "motorcycle", because the four-wheeled car is the epitome of transportation, right?

And people never choose inferior solutions because that's what they're used to, right? It's not like automakers constantly deliberately compromise efficiency in order to make vehicles look more like what their buyers are used to. It's not like entire lines of vehicles have been reworked to be less efficient in order to address consumer aesthetics criticisms -- some of which were over things that later became standard on vehicles as consumers got used to them (such as embedded headlights, raked windshields, etc) -- right?

And it's not like the auto industry is ridiculously slow to adapt to change. That's why most cars are built out of composites and use general-purpose computing platforms instead of a bunch of single-purpose boxes that have to be re-engineered for each vehicle, right?

No, clearly cars are as good as they're ever going to be!

Re:Snow.

[ResidentSourcerer]

If you don't have snow, you don't have winter. You have extended fall and early spring.

Living in the Great White North we have some extra seasons:

Winter is the longest one, starting usually in November and running through to April. Then we have Thaw, when the snow disappears, followed by Mud. Then we get Spring, when things start greening up, followed by Summer and Autumn.

Sometimes we get Monsoon between Spring and Summer.

***

I looked at the Aptera. I thought it VERY cool. It looked like it was going fast just when it was parked.

A 3 wheel vehicle doesn't have to be unusable in winter: Consider if you used a variable frequency diesel generator coupled to VFD electric motors on each wheel. This would give you 3wd.

The Aptera may still have had issues due to it's low ground clearance. (City of Edmonton doesn't plow it's non-arterial streets, so residential areas are a mine field of 8" deep ruts.)

Another issue it may have had would be low visibility in drifting snow. Both becuase it be hard to see the car, and the driver would have a hard time seeing anything else.

Re:Snow.

[ResidentSourcerer]

I live in central Alberta, about an hour outside of Edmonton.

Rural highways don't get an hourly treatment, but it is unusual to have more than 2-3 inches of snow on them. Here, 2 inches per hour is heavy snowfall.

Farm roads will generally be plowed within 24 hours if they are on a bus route, 72 hours if they are not.

Small towns generally have a grader. Depending on the town policy they may wait until the dawn of the next business day (to not pay overtime or shift differential).

Edmonton has followed a policy of NOT plowing residential streets in order to save money. Last year we had the heaviest accumulated snowfall on record. The city council broke down and plowed all the residential streets. Took over a month.

It also revealed a problem with the cute curvy maze streets with 7 houses per acre: Where do you put the snow? Cul-de-sacs had 15 foot high piles in the centre of the turn-a-round with barely a lane around them. People who owned multiple vehicles were used to parking one on the street, and found that everyone else was pissed off with them. Between the windrows of snow and the vehicles lanes were just inches wider than most cars. God help you if you had a hummer.

Re:Snow.

[optimism]

The heart of downtown Edmonton might just barely qualify as part of the "urbanized western world".

One hour outside Edmonton, you are clearly and definitely in extreme-climate rural territory.

Your comments on the Edmonton plowing are interesting. I understand why eg NYC has this problem. Manhattan rarely gets a large snow fall, so they don't maintain the equipment and staff for massive snow removal.

But I would have thought that a high-latitude city would have the sense to design their streets with snow-clearing in mind.

Anyway...to reiterate...Aptera was selling their initial vehicle to only to California residents who never have snow or ice on their commutes. Never. Not even 1mm. So snow and ice were irrelevant.

Re:Snow.

[Pentium100]

Where I live (a Eastern European country), in my city (2nd largest in the country) only the main streets are cleaned often (a couple times a day maybe), while all smaller streets are cleaned maybe once a day or less. Every time it starts snowing for the first time we hear that whatever budget that was allocated for road cleaning was already used up as it snowed much more than expected (even though it snows about the same every year). So, if it snowed during the night and is below freezing during the day, then expect a lot of fishtailing if your car is RWD. If it does not snow during the day, then the cars somewhat clean the street.
Well, at least the snow fills all the potholes. Until spring, when the potholes become even bigger.

Re:Snow.

[lisp-hacker]

Southern germany: last year I counted 1day, the year before 2 days, where I swapped my bicycle for the local train, because the snow was hindering. (I have to ride 17km) But cars had an average speed of about 7km/h these days. Perhaps it is easier to telecommute.

goatse alert.

[drinkypoo]

Goatse alert.

This is just the latest Corbin Sparrow, and the sparrow failed. This failed again. Whee!

So there's no market for a car

[Anonymous Coward]

but there's a market for private space tourism? Oh boy, Space Nutters are in for a shock! But their powers of self-deception are tremendous.

Re:So there's no market for a car

[Toonol]

You can't give up on the crusade, can you? Even on a story that has nothing to do with space travel...

I fear your obsession is turning malignant.

wrong target audience

[roman_mir]

This car is interesting but it was aimed at the wrong consumer. US consumer cannot afford this vehicle, because US consumer is subsidized (especially now with the Government Motors), and all the various loans, that make it too cheap for the US consumer, who can't really afford the new cars buy them with government guaranteed loans.

The company should have moved the idea to China and started there and aimed at the local Chinese market. I think they were going with a more or less correct idea in terms of the product, but they were not doing it at the right time and definitely not aiming it at the right clients.

Re:wrong target audience

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes let's export more US innovation to China, that's the ticket.

The chinks are going to melt down in a way that make the current US / Euro woes look like a slightly bad week in an otherwise bear market. Anyone folish enough to invest in China further than exploiting cheap labor and lax environmental laws is a fool.

Re:wrong target audience

[Anonymous Coward]

it's the investors' decision, not yours.

Re:wrong target audience

[TheLink]

The Chinese use electric powered bikes. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1904334,00.html

I doubt they'd spend tens of kilobux they don't have on an electric powered trike

Re:wrong target audience

[FooAtWFU]

The Chinese luxury market is huge right now and easily dropping kilobucks and megabucks on all sorts of status symbols. Of course, once you're in that market, you don't care about fuel costs and you can find a better status symbol than that thing.

Re:wrong target audience

[russotto]

The Chinese use electric powered bikes. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1904334,00.html

I doubt they'd spend tens of kilobux they don't have on an electric powered trike

You see electric powered bikes all over New York City as well, but one thing has nothing to do with another. An electric bike isn't intended as a car replacement, whereas the Aptera is.

Re:wrong target audience

[TheLink]

I doubt anyone in China who wants a car would buy the Aptera. This is what they buy:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/01/chinas-best-selling-cars-of-2010/
http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1909818,00.html

As for elsewhere, who (other than car collectors like Jay Leno) would buy an Aptera? And why? If I had USD20K to spend on a vehicle I'd certainly buy something else. More range, more seating capacity.

If I was rich and was going to buy an electric vehicle just for "cool factor", I'd buy something like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5xf1zWSuWc :)

I am shocked! Surprised! Horrified!

[Colin Smith]

Who would have thought a company producing this!:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/cm/popularmechanics/images/ib/aptera-8-doors-up.jpg
might go out of business.....

Y'now, cars are the shape they are for a reason. Or in fact many reasons.

 

Re:I am shocked! Surprised! Horrified!

[mosb1000]

If they were actually producing it they might not have gone out of business.

Also, what's wrong with the shape? Do you hate it just because it doesn't look like other cars? It looks good, like an airplane with no wings.

Re:I am shocked! Surprised! Horrified!

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean this shape: http://www.ausbcomp.com/~bbott/cars/lutzmann.jpg
Or do you mean "What we are used to!".
Do you realize that there was a time before what you see today was what we are used to?

Yes, that Aptera thing is fuck-ugly. But it's NOT right to reject it just because it looks different. Because that's as dumb as meeting the first human with a green skin, who can program like a god, but not hiring him just because he looks different.
It depends on if the whole package is the right choice. (Which the Aptera is not... for me at least, mainly because of the price, but also because at that price, it should at least look great.) Which is why it's not sexism to not hire a 1.52m petite woman to play against a football team that looks like they are from Warhammer 40k. ;)

Re:I am shocked! Surprised! Horrified!

[laird]

The Aptera looks like it does for a reason - its primary goal is efficiency, which is how they got over 200 MPG.

But to do that, they had to not waste energy pushing the car through the air. So they made it aerodynamic, so it looks like an airplane rather than the traditional "box on wheels." And their initial target was a two seater, which is most efficient (because most driving is 1-2 people, and with a two seater you're pushing around less mass).

A year ago (apparently) marketplace realities kicked in. That is, while sedans are less efficient, people prefer buying them because it's useful to be able to carry more people when you need to. So the marketplace for sedans is much larger than two seaters, making it a much smarter business to be in. But since they didn't get their funding, we'll never know how that would have played out.

Though I would love to see what a truly efficient sedan might look like.

Re:I am shocked! Surprised! Horrified!

[Robin47]

But since they didn't get their funding, we'll never know how that would have played out.

But we do know how it played out.

Re:I am shocked! Surprised! Horrified!

[Anonymous Coward]

It looks good, like an airplane with no wings.

If by "airplane with no wings" you meant something closer to "sperm with wheels", then yes, that's exactly what it looks like. That's probably also part of the reason so few people were interested in it. Who the hell is going to drive around in a $20K+ sperm with wheels that has less agility than a motorcycle and less stability than a real car, no matter how efficient it is?

Re:I am shocked! Surprised! Horrified!

[Anonymous Coward]

As an engineer who has done aerodynamic and vehicle-system studies on vehicles like Aptera - I can tell you that the Aptera's advantage in aerodynamics was marginal. Cars don't need to be shaped like airplanes because they don't fly, they're better as long shallow bumps on the road. The possible gains in efficiency from Aptera's body design would be completely offset by the lack of space inside the body for larger, more efficient motors and batteries.

Finally, any stated MPGe from Aptera should be taken lightly - they got 5th place in the Automotive X-prize after failing to even finish the length of the race, with a 161 mpg equivalent as calculated by the X-prize people.

Re:I am shocked! Surprised! Horrified!

[luther349]

agreed. im driving a truck with a camper slide in. yes its a 4 cylander and a light camper. but its not fuel effcent due to the wight. but with me currently traveling for work its the most useful car i have.

Re:I am shocked! Surprised! Horrified!

[Colin Smith]

I don't hate it. it's simply useless to me, and I suspect many millions upon millions of others.
 

Re:I am shocked! Surprised! Horrified!

[Rei]

Aptera had a waiting list of thousands of people who had not only never test-driven one before, but put $500 into a vehicle in a company that had never produced or sold anything before. If that's not "interest", what is?

Re:I am shocked! Surprised! Horrified!

[Rei]

That's absolutely not true in the least. They were getting about 100Wh/mi at 55mph on flat ground. Do you realize how incredible that is for a full size non-cramped two-passenger EV with full safety, climate control, entertainment, etc systems?

At highway speeds, aerodynamic drag is the dominant energy loss mechanism. Drag is proportional to cross-sectional area (rounded body = corners cut off, and the driver in the Aptera vehicles is a bit more tilted back) and drag coefficient (which *dramatically* varies between vehicles, and was obscenely low on their vehicles). We're talking less total aerodynamic drag at a given speed than a person riding a bike.

The main drag mechanisms on a passenger vehicle are:
  * Road turbulence
  * Wheel turbulence
  * Turbulence from protrusions (mirrors, wipers, etc)
  * Wake turbulence (a *big* one)

A smooth underside dramatically reduces turbulence between the vehicle and the road. Shrouded wheels dramatically reduce wheel turbulence. The Aptera (depending on the version) either eliminates or significantly reduces mirror presence, and the windshield wipers are shrouded (and the antenna is concealed, and all sorts of other such issues). And most importantly they do dramatic things to reduce wake turbulence. Rather than a kammback and vortex generators, they simply keep laminar flow adhering to the skin all the way to the rear, which is a superior solution (which is why aircraft, where aerodynamic drag is utterly critical, use it). And what little bit of wake turbulence is left is filled in with internal air, like the wake-filling rockets on some modern artillery shells.

There's a lot of complexities to vehicle drag, mind you, such as the effects of crosswinds on the drag coefficient, but your statement is just flat-out wrong.

And FYI, Wilbur totalled the vehicle with a redesign, turning it into a bloated, heavy, higher drag monstrosity, which they entered into the X-prize with minimal testing.

Re:I am shocked! Surprised! Horrified!

[Rei]

Oh, and I forgot another major drag mechanism:
  * Airflow through the engine

Obviously, an EV needs way less air intake. The Aptera models used little "nostrils" next to the headlights, and were otherwise smooth up front.

Re:I am shocked! Surprised! Horrified!

[mattack2]

WHY is it useless to you?

Isn't getting you to work and back, and maybe the grocery store, enough for most people?

It's a toy "trike" and looks like it.

[couchslug]

Trikes are registered as motorcycles in the US in the same way as a conventional MC with a side car.

They aren't serious transportation. They are fun, but don't have the AGILITY of a two-wheeler or the STABILITY of a four-wheeler (wheels under each corner come in handy).

This isn't a blow against practical EVs, it's just one less toy. Since trikes don't have to meet crash standards, it was an understandable workaround....that's been done before....but makes it a toy.

Re:It's a toy "trike" and looks like it.

[knarf]

Who says sidecar bikes 'aren't serious transportation'? I ride my (soviet-era) Ural all year round, through all weather. Roads are often unpaved here, but that does not stop me. The distances can be substantial, but that does not stop me either. Temperature varies from around 20-25ÂC summertime to -25ÂC winter. In winter we often have up to a meter of snow on the ground.

I live in Sweden. The bike weighs 350 kg unloaded. The Red Army chased the Germans back to Berlin on (the predecessors of) these things. Not serious transportation... not for you, maybe.

I'll give you the lack of crash protection - just don't crash the thing and you'll be fine. It is them silly cagers - that is people rolling around in four-wheeled cages - you have to look out for, they are the real hazard out there on the roads.

Re:It's a toy "trike" and looks like it.

[Anonymous Coward]

> Trikes are registered as motorcycles in the US

Which leads me to ask if you were even remotely considering the Aptera, then why not consider an electric motorcycle like the Zero Motorcycles [http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/]? They are already selling, new battery packs getting 100 mile range, been on the street for a few years already. Seriously, the Aptera isn't going to give you any better crash protection than a motorcycle anyways.

Re:It's a toy "trike" and looks like it.

[couchslug]

I'm an avid motorcyclist myself, but even a good sidehack isn't much of a hauler. Kudos for being a determined enthusiast!

"The Red Army chased the Germans back to Berlin on (the predecessors of) these things. Not serious transportation... not for you, maybe."

The "chasing" was mutual:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMZ-Ural

Re:It's a toy "trike" and looks like it.

[Rei]

Is that a joke? The Aptera crush test results were getting over 4x the federal standard for roof crush and nearly 2x the standard for door crush. Full airbags, standard automotive glass, composite skin, sloped front-end with an internal structure designed to collapse at an angle to push the vehicle up and over in a collision, and on and on. On what grounds are you calling it unsafe?

Composite vehicles are generally the safest vehicles on the road.

I just want something to get to and from the train

[RandomFactor]

Another one bites the dust...

Is there anything out there yet that is

  - reasonably inexpensive
  - short-mid range capable (long range not required, i have a regular car if needed)
  - charges on house current (prefer all-electric)
  - reasonably road safe
  - can still keep me reasonably warm in winter (cool in summer a plus, but not as important)
  - has a radio
  -some cargo/passenger room would be nice to have since the grocery stores are only a few miles away
  - Doesn't really need to top 45mph, I'm thinking train commute (back-roads, grocery run, maybe occasional kid pickup from school)

Appearance is not a major consideration.

Really what I need seems to be in a sweet spot between CEV and general use passenger car. Is there such a thing out there? Am I missing something? Economics still seem to point to cheap gas vehicles (which is vaguely annoying).

Died in 2008 with the hiring of Paul Wilbur

[Shivetya]

He ousted two of the originals and was a old school car guy, it was no wonder that nothing that had been created before he arrived would ever satisfy him, nor much of any chance innovation was going to stick.

Re:Died in 2008 with the hiring of Paul Wilbur

[Anonymous Coward]

Absolutely true. I used to work for Aptera and Paul Wilbur repeatedly dishonest with the investors. Now in the final days of the company it turns out he has lied about the government support to invest in Aptera. Hopefully this will be the last automotive job this scumbag ever has.

Aptera vs Solyndra

[Doc Ruby]

House Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA) has been holding hearings on the corruption he accuses Obama having when Federal loan guarantees were given to Solyndra, the large solar startup that went out of business this year. Issa has also been busy denying his own work using his own power to try to get the same loan guarantees for Aptera, which is in his own district. Now Aptera has also failed. Will Issa investigate himself for corruption?

Re:Aptera vs Solyndra

[Karzz1]

Ahh.. typical American* politicians; "Hello kettle, this is pot...".

* I am a US citzen and I vote. Unfortunately in regard to American politics, there is no choice only a lack of options.

Re:Aptera vs Solyndra

[Attila Dimedici]

Were Aptera's investors major donors to Issa's campaign? If not, there is no comparison with the Solyndra case. Additionally, while Aptera may not have been a good choice for a government loan (I do not know, but their going out of business now suggests that maybe so), it was in Issa's district. It is part of his job to assist companies in his district in dealing with the federal government. At no point in any of the letters that are quoted in your link did he do any more than say he was requesting that Aptera's application be "given full consideration." If Issa's letter had brought up legislation in front of his committee as well as the loan guarantee, then there would be something to this comparison. In the Solyndra case, the loan appears to have been approved over the objections of the non-political staff at the Energy Department...not only that, when it became obvious that Solyndra was going bankrupt the loans were re-written so that the investors would get their money out before the loans were repaid in bankruptcy.
This does not mean that I approve of Issa's support for Aptera, just that it appears to be a different class of problem from Solyndra.

Re:Aptera vs Solyndra

[laird]

Solyndra's investors weren't particularly Obama donors - the Waltons (i.e. Walmart) were major investors, and they're hardly Obama fans. Keep in mind also that Solyndra was started and was fast-tracked for funding under a DOE program started under Bush, and Obama's [ep[;e actually slowed things down, did more due diligence, and put more protections in place around the loans that ended up saving us money by pulling the plug on the company. Despite Issa's partisan spinning, this isn't something to blame Obama on - any time the government sets up a fund to promote businesses, some of those businesses will succeed and some will fail, and Solyndra failed because China radically dropped the price of solar cells, wiping out Solyndra's market. The real problem isn't that the US government set up a fund to encourage solar development, it's that the US started years later than China, and with a much lower level of investment, so China is beating us. The answer isn't to give up, it's to compete harder.

Re:Aptera vs Solyndra

[Attila Dimedici]

It was not "fast-tracked" for funding under Bush. The Solyndra loan was put on hold by the Bush Administration (at least partly because they were not going to be able to complete evaluation before the transition and therefore left it for the new Administration to reach a decision). The Obama Administration may have put more "due diligence" in place, but they then made a decision before that "due diligence" was completed. Somebody from the DOE predicted that Solyndra would go bankrupt in September of 2011 before the DOE renegotiated the loan guarantees so that the investors would get paid first, then, what do you know, Solyndra went bankrupt in September 2011. The Administration is trying to claim that the email predicting the bankruptcy was talking about something else, but this is the same Administration that claims upper levels of the Administration were unaware of Project Fast & Furious when they were making speeches touting the program.

Re:Aptera vs Solyndra

[Anonymous Coward]

1) the bad gov assessments of Solyndra that people like to reference are AFTER the loan was out and they were monitoring the progress seeing them going down; there wasn't much that could be done after they got the loan and it looked grim.

2) China's cheap solar and is likely subsidized as they want to lead in this new market; plus they are investing far far more into making it cheap than a pittance of loan guarantees-- which are not actual loans but are bailouts for when risky loans go bad.

3) Hard to say, from what I've seen politicians tout programs with good looking stats or some staffer/friend's word and actually have no idea what the thing is they are touting. Politicians routinely talk about and praise things they don't know jack about-- they lie for a living, its easy for them to get into bad endorsement situations and then have people read too much into it; its more of a conspiracy theory than most conspiracy theories because its so difficult to know if they were bullshitting or actually aware. Have you ever had somebody you know or project you were in get praised by a politician? They quite often have no clue other than a few summary points and some stats probably from the overview. Now if they don't blab about things they delegate then they don't get any recognition or credit and politics is all about taking credit... and shifting blame... in that sense (and hardly no other) it is a lot like business management.

Re:Aptera vs Solyndra

[Attila Dimedici]

If you were familiar with Operation Fast & Furious you would know that there was no way that a career bureaucrat would have approved that program without approval from a political appointee (and probably only with the belief that it had been approved all the way up to at least the Attorney General).
As to point one, yes that is true, but it was NOT after the loan was rewritten to put the investors ahead of repaying the government loan in bankruptcy. One of the reasons that it is true is because they did not wait for the evaluation of the company to be completed before they approved the loan.

The problem...

[Lumpy]

If your wierd car costs $20K-$40K then I can tell you without a doubt that you will fail instantly.
Wierd and efficient cars need to target the sub $9000 price point for a econo 2 seater. There are a metric buttload more buyers at that price point than the more likely $40K per car point that it would have ended up at.

Chevy understood this as well as Nissan. They are producing incredibly few Volts and Leafs because they know there is no market for an economy car at $40K. the economics of the cars do not make any sense to anyone, and the only buyers will be "look at me I'm green! LOOK AT ME!!!!!" people who have a lot of money for a toy. If the chevy volt looked 100% identical to a $15,000 car it would have sold nothing at all because there is no "LOOK AT ME!!1!1!" factor.

Honda Civic new is $16,000. Chevy Sonic is $15,000 Both get 40mpg. If your car costs MORE than that you are set up for Instant-FAIL. Even if it was to get 60mpg. In reality a new, never heard of company needs to be way,way, under that to get sales because nobody wants to "risk" getting stuck with a poorly built or defective car from a unknown car company.

Re:The problem...

[jeti]

If you're new to building cars, you can't go for cheap. You can't compete with mass-produced cars on price and you don't have the capital to set up mass production. If the manual labor required for assembling your car makes it 10k more expensive than a comparable car of a big company, your best hope is to produce cars for a market segment where the uniqueness of your model is worth the additional cost to enough customers.

That's why most small car companies produce super sports cars. It doesn't matter if they cost 210k instead of 200k. But selling a small car for 25k when the competing product costs 15k just doesn't work. Tesla was smart to start with the Roadster. Now they have the means to go after a bigger market with the Sedan.

Re:The problem...

[Anonymous Coward]

$9000? That is the cost of a new street motorcycle. BTW why doesn't electric street motorcycles get more attention? They have WAY more power to weight and way easier to design a reasonably long distance street vehicle...

Re:The problem...

[Bill Dimm]

BTW why doesn't electric street motorcycles get more attention?

Motorcycle riders can't figure out how to take the baffles out, so they'll never catch on.

Re:The problem...

[Anonymous Coward]

You are trying to explain economics and rational thought to enviro-wackos who care for neither. Good luck with that.

Re:The problem...

[DerekLyons]

If the manual labor required for assembling your car makes it 10k more expensive than a comparable car of a big company, your best hope is to produce cars for a market segment where the uniqueness of your model is worth the additional cost to enough customers.

That's the OP's point - the Aptera is too expensive for the economy segment, and too underperforming/oddly styled for the (more well heeled) 'green fetish/stylish' market. Or, in other words, at it's price point the Aptera is a solution in search of a market. It's failure should have been predictable as it's problem isn't (as the submitter seems to think) that it's too late, but that it was wrongly conceived right out of the box.

Tesla was smart to start with the Roadster. Now they have the means to go after a bigger market with the Sedan.

With the small number produced, it's extraordinarily unlikely that Tesla accumulated sufficient capital to 'go after' the Sedan, they're probably relying on financing and the proceeds from their IPO. But, the Sedan is still going to be a very expensive car for it's performance level - like the Roadster (and the Volt, and the Leaf), aimed mostly at the (fairly small) 'green fetish/stylish' market. We're still a very long way off from a consumer level electric vehicle, one that can compete on price with the Honda Civic and similar cars in that (sub $20k) range.

Re:The problem...

[luther349]

yea i had this fight with my buddy when he wanted a Prius. the extra cost of the car you never get back in fule saving. where you can get something like a 40mpg chevy eco or another small car a 3rd of the cost. unless you plain on spending 20k in gas over the next 5-10 years the avg for people who buy new cars its not worth it.

Re:The problem...

[Jeremi]

If the chevy volt looked 100% identical to a $15,000 car it would have sold nothing at all because there is no "LOOK AT ME!!1!1!" factor.

I don't know, the Volt and the Civic look pretty similar to me.

Re:The problem...

[Rei]

Really? People don't spend big bucks on unusual, niche cars? What world are you living in? There's a whole industry out there, ranging from the Big Three to little garage shops, that exists specifically to sell low-volume, unusual, high-cost cars to enthusiasts who love them specifically for their differences.

Re:The problem...

[Anonymous Coward]

You are trying to explain economics and rational thought to enviro-wackos who care for neither. Good luck with that.

Fuck off, conservatard -- understanding economics and rational thought is a major reason why I count myself as an environmentalist. Because, you know, the environment happens to be pretty fucking important to the continued health of not only the US economy, but the entire world's.

Of course, you probably choose not to believe that the environment's important. After all, you're an irrational prejudiced conservative loon who thinks anything with "enviro-" in its name means tree hugging hippies who smell bad, and you wouldn't want to be associated with hippies!

Re:The problem...

[mattack2]

The 3rd generation Prius gets 51 mpg highway. Of course, that's EPA estimates. Hypermilers get more, many everyday people probably get less.

Not everyone buys a hybrid (or any other car) JUST to make up the difference in price. What if we just want to use less/NO gas? (BTW, I currently drive a gas powered car as sole occupant, but unless my car dies unexpectedly and I need a new one NOW, my next car will be at _worst_ a Prius, and hopefully a full electric.)

Why don't you use your same argument against anyone who buys a BMW or Porsche?

Re:The problem...

[luther349]

using less gas is not going to make any real difference in the end. if someone made a cheap all electric long rage car that was cheap and everyone started driving them they would still raise the cost of fuel because there not selling as much. yes theirs the guys who say im using less fuel and i don't care i spend 3 times the money for a car that's only slightly better. but so does my 2,000$ scooter and it gets 70mpg.

Re:The problem...

[mattack2]

Using less gas _will_ make a difference.. it will put less pollution (including carbon dioxide) in the air, and make it last longer for the vehicles that absolutely need it (e.g. airplanes).

Re:The problem...

[mattack2]

I mean fossil fuels in general. I realize planes don't use the same fuel that cars do.

Re:The problem...

[luther349]

we have plenty of gas for things that need it. we just found a huge well in North Dakota. the whole we will run out some day is just the excuse they use to jack up prices. also if we quit frigging getting are oil from the middle east and using are own wells we have plenty prices would fall. before you say amarcan wages dont forget shipping overseas is expensive and they do it twice once to ship another time to refine rather then doing it all at one place that cost alone is more then enought to support a decent wage.

Re:The problem...

[luther349]

hey i have no problem getting away from fuel myself. its one of the most heavily taxed profit scams in the world. its also the main reason governments will not get away from it. the only way the world will get away from fuel is when they run-out and that's not going to be in any of are lifetimes. probably not are grandchildren to.

Beautiful?? Envy-inspiring??

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you mean as in "Fuck, that things looks ugly!"?
Click those links. I dare you! It's like the Goatse of cars. No wonder nobody wanted to buy them.

Break out the rose colored glasses..

[HellYeahAutomaton]

Being in business for 6 years, building a working prototype, and getting $40 million in funding is a relative success.

Great job Aptera, hopefully everyone involved finds new work.

80 MPG with common technology? Yes.

[Anonymous Coward]

Combine an efficient, clean diesel engine with a lightweight, aerodynamic car: http://green.autoblog.com/2009/09/05/insight-1g-first-gen-honda-insight-with-diesel-upgrade-gets-80/

Of course, there are very efficient, small diesel offerings in Europe, but somehow "diesel" has become a cuss word in the states.

Re:Their car really were supposed to be beautiful.

[bev_tech_rob]

Nitpickers are idiots, too...

Aptera's reason for failure

[optimism]

This quote takes front & center of the company profile page on aptera.com:

The best fuel for encouraging innovation is saying "It can't be done".

Oooops. In other words, their company motto was "we will fail".

That same page has this American-embarrassing quote:

Aptera is a perfect example that Americans still know how to build stuff.

Ouch. I hope they were wrong about this.

Anyway, you can be sure the Aptera executives walked away with $ millions in their bank accounts, because Americans still know how to print money!

It's difficult

[JBMcB]

Building a concept car is relatively easy. Making a limited production run of expensive one-offs is also pretty easy. Mass producing a car affordable for the general market at a profit is *insanely* difficult. Basically, your quality has to be near-perfect, because one recall to fix a defective CV joint or door latch will blow your profit margin out of the water. So will rising commodity prices. So will rising labor prices. So will changing regulations. So will dozens of factors you probably haven't even thought about.

Re:It's difficult

[Anonymous Coward]

Mass producing a car affordable for the general market at a profit is *insanely* difficult.

One future for Aptera, after the bankruptcy auction, could be selling kits that include the major parts--buyer adds their own powertrain (electric, small motorcycle engine, Diesel industrial engine, etc). They have the molds and probably simple jigs for the metal parts, just not all the myriad details that make for a complete car. The kit car market is small, but it seems to survive--there are still some people that want something unique and are willing to put some sweat into it.

Re:I just want something to get to and from the tr

[Ritz_Just_Ritz]

Find yourself a cheap econobox gasser and convert it to electric. I have a soft spot for 1st generation Saturns since they're light and reasonably resistant to rust. It's not THAT expensive to do (US$10K in parts plus your labor) since the original car is practically free.

http://www.phoenixeaa.com/photoalbum/streetevs/suiter1/main.html

Oil prices will never be permanently high

[Colin Smith]

High oil prices destroy demand, causes recession and subsequent price collapse of oil.

Anyone who is going to market a replacement vehicle for oil based ones is going to have to market it to people who cannot afford oil when it's low. i.e. it hast to be cheap. Think TATA motors Nano, but electric and with reasonable range, which is a pricing challenge.

~$100 is the new low BTW.

Tar sands and pipelines forever

[PopeRatzo]

Obviously, this is further proof that that electric cars will never work and that all any alternative to burning gasoline for transportation is nothing but a liberal boondoggle and there's no such thing as climate change.

In the event that we ever run out of fossil fuels, we can just squeeze my cousin Randy. He's the greasiest guy I have ever met. Pores the size of nickels.

TWIKE: similar concept but alive

[Anonymous Coward]

Here in Europe we do have a three-wheeled vehicle called the TWIKE. It has been around for many years and is still a sucessfull business. It has a very simple (and much less futuristic structure) than the Aptera and even is available with pedals (the "active" version) in order to generate electricity for a longer battery life.
Here is the all-important link: http://www.twike.com/en/home/home.html

Re:TWIKE: similar concept but alive

[JockTroll]

Ah, the Twike... You don't know if you want to love it or hate it. It's got this lean, aircraft-cockpit shape that makes you want to take one for a ride - a black, finned one, of course - and see how it feels. On the other hand, you have this urge of taking up a M2 and pump it full of .50 cal death, screaming "DIE, YOU BASTARD, DIE!" and then torching the remains and axe-murdering any survivor.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder

[SpaghettiPattern]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. And this beholder thinks Aptera has no merit whatsoever. Looks like a veggie inspired pile of crap. Good riddance I say. Mankind is blessed by production problems.

I give that the car looks futuristic. And that has nothing to do with beauty. Would you want to drive around looking like the Jetsons, for the sake of what? The days are well past that futuristic was cool and hence sort of beautiful. Then the weight of 1800 lbs is hardly light. An average classic sports car weighs that much or even less, and most look infinitely better. The centre of gravity is unnecessary high for it to be fun to drive. Then the prices tag of 25 to 40kUSD. What?!

For real trike fun look at the Morgan Threewheeler. Proper motor with US and UK pedigree.

Don't get me wrong, I like electric/hybrid cars. In fact I think they are the future. But if you really want to make a difference with electric/hybrid cars, you must bring a rock solid and complete concept. I wager the Aptera appealed more to the tree huggers where it should have appealed to the motoring enthusiast.

New car companies in the west are being done wrong

[WindBourne]

The right way is to create a single company with multiple brands in which the core is shared. The brands are then owned by fairly wealthy ppl. Once you have the core tech off the ground and brands solid, then split the company along with the IP. Basically, to get car companies off the ground here, the founders need to learn to work together like we used to do, not trying to kill each other.

"liquidate assets..."

[Anonymous Coward]

Does that mean the designs, models and such are also on the auction block? Could somebody buy them and take another shot at this?

Re:I just want something to get to and from the tr

[Anonymous Coward]

- Doesn't really need to top 45mph, I'm thinking train commute (back-roads, grocery run, maybe occasional kid pickup from school)

Nope. This last will kill you. A car that can't break 45mph is a danger in any case where quick acceleration is needed or when a highway needs to be traveled, even for a short distance.

You don't want to have an emergency and be stuck in a golf cart that can't get up to safe highway speed. Given that highways are typically 65 mph, 45mph is the very bottom of the legal limit -- and you're talking about that as a maximum velocity.

Saving gas money

[Anonymous Coward]

[[I had been hoping to one day drive one of these to save gas money.]]

I, also, had been looking forward to paying a bunch of extra money up front for a car with limitations and that wouldn't every come out ahead, but would save me money at the pump every week while costing me at the checkbook every month instead. I'm saddened the Aptera didn't make it (I got to see it in person at Microsoft once) but at least there are alternatives.

Would have, if...

[OFnow]

We considered it, but since it was impossible to buy an Aptera we got a Mini. Plenty of folks would buy an unusual looking car (not sure how many in Nebraska would do so, but in major Metro areas, sure). Besides, full electric cars obviously won't work for rurals where the minimum trip to the store is 100 miles each way (with present technology).

The looks were cute (ok, call me crazy) and 2-wheels-forward is plenty safe, the unsafe 3-wheelers were 2-wheels-at-the-back. Though two-wheels-at-back 3-wheelers have provided endless amusement in the UK! For example in various Monty Python skits...

The 'sealed' design means air-conditioning had to be on all the time. I always wondered what percent of the battery would go to cooling the air.

Re:80 MPG with common technology? Yes.

[arth1]

Of course, there are very efficient, small diesel offerings in Europe, but somehow "diesel" has become a cuss word in the states.

In Europe, diesel is subsidized, so it costs less than gasoline. In the US, it's the opposite. Combined with the existing higher demand for petrol than diesel, diesel ends up costing more than gasoline. How much it actually uses is of less impact than the fact that Joe and Jane Redneck sees a higher price per gallon for diesel than for regular or even premium gasoline.
Add to that that the cost of the car itself is higher; so much so that it would take the better part of a decade to make up for the price difference in fuel savings.

And then there's the image. While electric car conveys an image of "clean", diesel conveys an image of "soot and grease". That's as important as actual facts, which the US population has never been too interested in.

a product without a customer

[Anonymous Coward]

Another idiot company, run by idiots who don't talk to customers.

I wrote them years ago, and ask them to maybe consider changing the look because I liked where the company was going but the product looked awful. Got a reply from their CEO or Chairman at the time saying something to the effect that everyone will like them because they will have no choice.

ha ha on you.

 

Very disappointed

[sandytaru]

I've been watching them since they first started working on the car. I cheered them on at the EV races two years ago. The Aptera was a great concept car that showed energy efficiency could look really cool in a way that no other EV has quite achieved yet. Even if it had a plain old boring conventional motor, the aerodynamic shape would have given it a good boost in gas mileage, and it just looked stylish. It really is a pity.

On the street

[justfred]

I live in Carlsbad, CA, where one of their facilities is, I've seen them (or maybe just one) driving down El Camino now and then. Looks like a disembodied small aircraft fuselage. Seems utterly un-crash-worthy. Very pretty, not very practical.

I remember when (last year) they were turned down for government assistance, because they had three wheels not four; wondered why they didn't just drag a bicycle wheel so they'd qualify.

Hoping to go by their offices next week and see if there's any evidence of getting rid of stuff.

Lies!!

[Anonymous Coward]

They where killed. No doubt about it. That is the way it goes in a carbon/credit society.

so much hate

[0111 1110]

What's with all the hate for the Aptera? Did the owner rape your sister or something? I can't believe so many of you are getting so worked up about hating this guy and his company and his car. I smell some kind of agenda, although I can't imagine what it could possibly be. Maybe you guys work for companies that make those pathetic hybrids that barely get more than 50 mpg? It was a concept car that never made it off the ground. It could have been any small automotive startup. The fact that it was a car that looked like an airplane and got much higher gas mileage than anything else on the road in North America is not why they failed. Even for major manufacturers, most concept cars never see the light of day. I would have bought an Aptera if they could have sold it for less than 30k. It was strikingly beautiful and had an incredibly low coefficient of drag. I think it would have been one of the best cars ever made.

For now I will continue to salivate over Volkswagen's efforts with the XL1. Although I much prefered the former, more radical, tandem 2 seater L1 A real jetson-mobile.

Re:so much hate

[luther349]

agreed. many concepts no matter how good most of the time they relies the car will be to expensive. wile 4 years ago they might have been able to get in the market with a mid cost ev now they have to compete with the the volt that is the same thing. wile it might be only 40 miles on the battery's alone on the volt thats enough for most people for in town driving and if its not use the gas engine/hybred modes. but even the volt cost to much to ever get the gas saving back in extra cost.

Re:so much hate

[evilviper]

It was a concept car that never made it off the ground. [...] Even for major manufacturers, most concept cars never see the light of day.

You have no idea what a "concept car" is. Pretty much none of them ever see the light of day (there are a few rare exceptions). They are mostly just expensive PR for car companies, with the occasional practical benefit of having some compelling elements that get put into other (production) vehicles.

Then again, they had a neat looking prototype with no business model and went bankrupt... Maybe the Aptera was a concept car after all.

Re:I just want something to get to and from the tr

[m50d]

Not sure what you mean by CEV. Maybe you want that fancy (conventional-fuelled) BMW enclosed motorcycle, though that doesn't give you any passenger room. I'd expect electric to not really get into this space until after full-scale cars are mainstream, because the big advantage of electric is cheaper fuel prices, and if you're talking about a small light short-range vehicle then fuel price is a much smaller issue at the moment,

WTF?

[bussdriver]

Sperm shaped? WTF? It looks like a small aircraft without the wings -- there was so much hate for something truly different.

I'm hoping they open source the designs or enough leaks out so somebody can put out a kit car or something. I'd bite.

Re:I just want something to get to and from the tr

[luther349]

a Chevy volt can go 35-40 miles battery power alone. and does all those things listed

Re:80 MPG with common technology? Yes.

[Anonymous Coward]

... so much so that it would take the better part of a decade to make up for the price difference in fuel savings

I drove a Beetle TDI as my daily commuter in Atlanta for a number of years. I averaged 47 mpg and drove 30,000 miles per year. A gasoline-powered Beetle would yield 30 mpg. Calculating the difference in cost of fuel per year at $3.70 for diesel and $3.30 for petrol, I still saved $938 per year. A TDI engine carried a $2500 premium in price. After 2.5 years the TDI paid for the difference. I sold it with over 200,000 miles on the clock for $4,500, which was about $2000 more than a comparable gasoline version. Over the 7-year ownership this extrapolates to $6400 in fuel cost savings plus gaining the $500 difference in purchase and selling price.

Your point is taken that there are many misconceptions about clean diesels.

You think the iPod, IPhone and iPad are perfect?

[Colin Smith]

Fan boy?

Re:You think the iPod, IPhone and iPad are perfect

[optimism]

Fan boy?

No.

I admit that I preferred Macs over PCs from about 1989-1998. And I preferred PowerBooks over most other laptops from about 1993-1998. But I have always run a mix of hardware and operating systems at the same time.

Currently most of my machines are IBM/Lenovo and Dell, running Windows or Kubuntu. One MacBook running OSX for Final Cut. But give me an X-series ThinkPad over any MacBook, no contest.

I've also burned through a huge number of handheld computers over the years...Sharp Wizard, Apple Newton, Palm Pilot, Handspring, Dell Axim PocketPC, etc. And music players...iRock, Archos, iRiver, iPod. And several tablet PCs.

Based on that experience, personally, I think that the iPod, iPhone, and iPad are as close to perfect as any device in their categories has ever come. Do they have problems? Yes. Like Apple's draconian control of their app market to prevent platform encroachment and leapfrogging. But I haven't seen anything better out there.

Frankly I was responding to the ego-driven-design part of your post, with which I agreed. If you think that makes me a fanboy, then please, share your credentials and perspective.

I'm going to guess right now that you're too lazy and/or stupid to do so.

Prove me wrong.

Re:80 MPG with common technology? Yes.

[arth1]

I drove a Beetle TDI as my daily commuter in Atlanta for a number of years. I averaged 47 mpg and drove 30,000 miles per year.

The average driving distance per year in the US is around 13,500 miles. So The average driver would not save $938 per year. Following the same figures, it would take around 6 years for the average driver to make up for the engine premium.
Which, incidentally is the same as the average car ownership length. I.e. the owners would not save anything, but be out extra money up front.

So it differs depending on how much you drive, and how you drive too.

I not the complainant ...

[timothy]

... but I have an answer :)

"Where is the "magical" place that you live or have lived, in the urbanized western world, where snow is NOT cleared within a matter of hours?"

Seattle, Washington.

Seattle's kind of an odd bird; everyone knows that it's rainy there, but besides the persistent (usually gentle) rain for much of the year, there's little snow, and lightning is very rare. Storms of the kind I grew up with and loved in the mid-Atlantic, and the sometimes monstrous storms I relished in central Texas, are quite uncommon in Seattle -- Seattle's "bad weather" typically means it's a touch colder than usual and / or the rain is actually pouring rather than as usual falling gently.

That means when snow comes, the city is generally unprepared. I had the interesting fortune to be house-sitting a few years back when a massive snow dump turned the city into an amusement part; I couldn't move my car for well over a week (10 days, I think) because -- goes the story -- the city has only 2 plows, and one of the horses was arthritic ;) Much political trouble erupted from the bewildered, ineffective response. I borrowed better shoes than I had worn over, trudged back to my own house for supplies, saw some interesting driving, including watching a bus fail to get up a medium-steep hill ...

(btw, to be clear, *some* of the city was cleared much sooner, but small streets were very low on the priority list, and the weather stayed cold long enough, with intermittent warming to get the ice flowing each day, that there was snow around parts of the city for a long time.)

timothy

Re:I just want something to get to and from the tr

[countertrolling]

I prefer a '59 Lincoln. 6200 pounds of pure American glory

should have sold to car share companies

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if Aptera ever considered marketing to car2go. It seems that car share companies would be a much better target market than the consumer market.

I hate to post a link to a company --I have no financial interest in them, am not a shill, etc. That said, car2go just opened an office in San Diego, and are a ready example. They're a car share service similar to ZipCar -- annual rate (currently $35), capped hourly and daily fees (~$14 and ~$65, respectively).
 
However, car2go's fleet uses only zero-emissions electric two-seater vehicles... like what Aptera was trying to sell. http://www.car2go.com/sandiego/en/concept/fleet/ (It looks like Apteras would have fit right into their profile (though I'm guessing they'd be the "luxury" model in car2go's fleet, maybe commanding $17/hr or so instead.)

While the car share concept has its limits, within those limits it can work *very well.* I've lived in three major metropolitan areas with car sharing services in the past five years. Even where the public transportation isn't great, if you only need to drive a few hours a month if at all, your vehicle expenses can be dramatically decreased. I haven't had to pay for insurance, gas, repairs, or parking ticket for years.
 

You insensitive clod!

[tlambert]

You insensitive clod!

He lives in a place where, if a power line is balanced at the top of a tall pole and falls off, they bury the damn thing and it never happens again.

Too bad that's not the U.S....

-- Terry

Re:You insensitive clod!

[optimism]

He lives in a place where, if a power line is balanced at the top of a tall pole and falls off, they bury the damn thing and it never happens again.

Too bad that's not the U.S....

This post makes very little sense.

1) Were you drunk when you posted this?
2) Where do you live?
3) Do you have any clue about the costs of aboveground vs underground lines in rural vs urban, wet vs dry, warm vs freezing, etc, environments?

I'm guessing the answers are:

1) Yes.
2) In a nameless US suburb where you are completely uninvolved with the infrastructure development.
3) No.

Feel free to correct me.

Re:I just want something to get to and from the tr

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait about 10 years and get a Nissan Leaf or Mitsubishi MiEV in the used car market.

They seem to have all the other attributes given other than the reasonably inexpensive part. For the prices they're going, you could get a much bigger conventional powered car brand-new or perhaps a nice and loaded low-milage used luxury car with a few years on it.

this sort of thing

[strack]

this sort of thing is why elon musk didnt take shit from the hippies in his company when building tesla motors into a viable business. sometimes you gotta bust some face and get shit done, or your company fucking dies.

Re:a product without a customer

[Rei]

Clearly you weren't a customer, so how is this "idiots who don't talk to customers"?

Aptera had a huge waiting list. Demand was not the problem.

compulsive driver??

[briancox2]

Oh, the such apologetic attitude of the greenies. Myself, I am a driver who recognizes it as the most positive lifestyle choice I can make to promote the well-being of my family. It allows me to work in a promising career without subjecting my family to the insane living conditions of urban environments. We need to stop and rethink the morality of trying to live a life of committing zero harm. The superior morality is to live a life that does such abundant good that the small amount of harm we commit is insignificant. After all, we will always do some amount of harm.

Re:I just want something to get to and from the tr

[evilviper]

Sounds like you want to slightly mod a GEM.

They're very cheap.
Adding rigid doors will cost just a bit more.
Up to 4-seats, plus a small "trunk".
For heat, one of these might do.
Street legal on roads up to 35MPH.
Top-speed of 25MPH is easily fixed. (no longer street-legal)

Re:80 MPG with common technology? Yes.

[Anonymous Coward]

In Europe, diesel is subsidized, so it costs less than gasoline.

Wrong: Diesel isn't subsidized (except in certain communist or OPEC nations). What is different is the production and distribution system is much more geared towards diesel production.

Man.

Why are you always wrong arth1?